-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/796a4f09a9f1a603ec82c8f0cd7848d4.pdf
671931147e2c5893ead6db3ff5ba251a
PDF Text
Text
NLWJC-KAGAN
EMAILS RECEIVED
ARMS - BOX 042 - FOLDER -007
[01/11/1999]
�Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
DATE
SUBJECTffITLE
RESTRICTION
001. email
Mike Cohen to Michael Cohen et al. at 07:56:03.00 re: Materials for
reponse to POTUS re: Edley [partial] (I page)
01111/1999
P6/b(6)
002. email
Mike Cohen to Michael Cohen et al. at 07:57:03.00 re: Materials for
reponse to POTUS re: Edley [partial] (J page)
01/11/1999
P6/b(6)
003. email
Mike Cohen to Michael Cohen et al. at 07:58:23.00 re: Materials for
reponse to POTUS re: Edley [partial] (J page)
0111111999
P6/b(6)
004. email
Mike Cohen to Michael Cohen et al. at 07:58:43.00 re: Materials for
reponse to POTUS re: Edley [partial] (I page)
01/1111999
P6/b(6)
005. email
Thomas Freedman to Elena Kagan et al. re: The Box (J page)
01/1111999
P6/b(6)
006. email
Sylvia Mathews to Elena Kagan and Beverly Barnes re: List of One
Pagers (I page)
01/1111999
P6/b(6)
007. email
Christopher Edley Jr. to Elena Kagan and Maria Echaveste re:
returning your call (J page)
01/1111999
P6/b(6)
008. email
Christopher Edley, Jr. to Elena Kagan and Maria Echaveste re: Notice
of Visiting Appointments (I page)
0111111999
Personal Misfile
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPD ([Kagan])
ONBox Number: 250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[01/1111 999]
2009-I006-F
bm79
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - 144 U.S.c. 2204(a)l
Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.c. 552(b)l
PI National Security Classilied Information l(a)(l) of the PRAI
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office l(a)(2) of the PRAI
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute l(a)(3) of the PRAI
b(l) National security classified information l(b)(l) of the FOIAI
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency l(b)(2) of the FOIAI
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute l(b)(3) of the FOIAI
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or conlidential or linancial
information l(b)(4) of the FOIAI
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
linancial information l(a)(4) of the PRAI
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors la)(5) of the PRAI
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(a)(6) of the PRAI
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile deli ned in accordance with 44 U.S.c.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(b)(6) of the FOIAI
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes l(b)(7) of the FOIAI
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
linancial institutions l(b)(8) of the FOIAI
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells l(b)(9) of the FOIAI
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
001. email
DATE
SUBJECTffITLE
Mike Cohen to Michael Cohen et al. at 07:56:03.00 re: Materials for
reponse to POTUS re: Edley [partial] (I page)
01/11/1999
RESTRICTION
P61b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPD ([Kagan])
OAlBox Number:
250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[0111111999]
2009-1006-F
bm79
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - 144 U.S.c. 2204(a)1
Freedom of Information Act -15 U.S.c. 552(b)1
PI National Security Classified Information l(a)(1) of the PRAI
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRAI
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRAI
b(l) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIAI
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA[
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIAI
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA[
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIAI
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA[
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA[
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA[
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA[
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRAI
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA[
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.c.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�· ARMS Email System
Page 1 of 13
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Mike Cohen <mikec_20904@yahoo.com> ( Mike Cohen <mikec_20904@yahoo.com> [ U
CREATION DATE/TIME:II-JAN-1999 07:56:03.00
SUBJECT:
Materials for response to POTUS re:Edley
TO: Michael Cohen
CN=Michael Cohen/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ) )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO ) )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Bruce N. Reed ( CN=Bruce N. Reed/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ) )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ) )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
PS/(b)(S)
Attached are two draft documents. One is a summary of our accountability
proposals, reflecting our meeting on Friday. I've sent a copy to Mike
Smith to make sure he is ok with it, and will check with him as soon as I
get in.
The second is a draft memo to POTUS responding to the issues Edley raises
in his memo. I envision attaching the accountability document to this
memo, though if that will be too much the memo can be revised accordingly.
I'll touch base as soon as I get in--page me if you need me before that.
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free ®yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
- newact2.wpd - edleyr.wpd==================== ATTACHMENT
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE:
0 00:00:00.00
1 ====================
TEXT:
Unable to convert ARMS_EXT: [ATTACH.D16)MAIL48795401X.036 to ASCII,
The following is a HEX DUMP:
FF575043C8070000010A02010000000205000000DF3D000000020000B3CD2F6E4352C57DFB2AOB
19F432F6DCD45A2A55BIACEAIA3A9BD51217DC975F14B032C2FB43F3Cl3D043580BC35136563EA
490AA24659160D65DE7E6ADOA52AB762DD2911326F51CE2A897E20FB633592C7EAF2B5491763D5
AFA7CCD34450CBAF00824A3AD75B98ED9C419FF95EI070F6CF41AA25E426OFA50061F89137F52E
3A61F206137BD6990336F36F9029C059479EEFBODDA418366EEDDF97234ACA77D6DOA22C14A6CB
7282AE4C601274635F8EIF5AC5641DIFID6DOB419FC43A2CIA9CA08E7528C20EB64032FE3EA072
ED88A1306765A008F5797E3C5103E0503BICFFCA32BC58C2846FODCE40B4F7DEA77873884BE9E4
D14B0935556BB079BB276F5B615769BAF54E8218E7B07513223CEAEE16FB012AIEIBC673FE73BB
C13F7AB39F55E6BCD9139CAE4A64902D353257BOA7D6E175F84961BOCOB647666926820DDB7F9C
�Automated Records Manage~ent System
Hex-Dump Conversion
1/10
Strengthening Accountability for Results in ESEA
The 1994 enactment of Goals 2000 and reauthorization of ESEA marked a sea-change in
federal education policy by insisting that states set high standards for all students, measure
student and school progress toward reaching the standards, and by taking the first steps to focus
accountability on achieving results rather than complying with regulations. Our 1999 ESEA
reauthorization proposal will complete this process by establishing a basic framework for holding
states and school districts, schools and teachers, and students accountable for results. It does this
by building on and strengthening provisions already in law and adding new provisions.
Taken together, our approach to strengthening accountability for results would require states to:
Establish High Standards and Aligned Assessments. We would retain provisions of current
law, which require states to establish content and student performance standards and assessments
aligned to the standards by 2000-01 school year. States must also define adequate yearly
progress increases in the percentage of students meeting state performance standards -- for
Title 1 schools and local school districts in a manner that would result in continuous and
substantial progress toward meeting state standards within a reasonable time frame.
Produce and Disseminate School, District and State Report Cards that Focus on Results.
As a condition of receiving ESEA funds, we would require states and school districts to produce
annual report cards, easily understood by and widely distributed to parents and the public, for
each school, school district and the state as a whole. The report cards would include
information on student achievement, teacher quality, school safety, attendance, graduation rates.
Where appropriate the student achievement data would be dis aggregated by demographic
subgroups, to allow a greater focus on the gaps between minority and majority, low-income and
In addition, states would be required to publicly identify the lowest
more advantaged students.
performing schools, so that parents and community members are aware of the need for
improvement, and so local school boards and school administrators are under immediate pressure
to address the situation.
Title 1 currently requires school and school district profiles, including disaggregated
achievement data. Our proposal strengthens this provision by requiring report cards for all
schools, not just those participating in Title 1, expanding the data to be reported, requiring the
report cards to be widely disseminated, and requiring state level report cards as well.
Take Immediate Corrective Actions to Turn Around the Lowest Performing Schools.
States would be required to identify no more than 5% of its schools as low performing, and make
the identification public. These should be the schools with the lowest levels of student
performance which have made little or no improvement over the previous 3 years. States must
take corrective actions in these schools, based on an external audit and which address
1
�Automated Records Management System
Hex-Dump Conversion
fundamental staffing and curricular issues that are fundamental for improved student
performance. Initially, corrective actions will include steps such as provision of extended
learning opportunities, implementation of proven school reform models, and extensive teacher
training. If these actions do not result in satisfactory improvements in student performance
within [2] years, corrective actions must then include steps to replace adults in the school, either
by reconstituting the school and making wholesale staff changes, or by closing the school down
entirely and reopening it with new staff or as a charter school. If these steps do not work, the state
must repeat them until they do; the Secretary will also have the authority to withhold ESEA
funds provided for state administration. This approach will penalize state officials without taking
funds away from services to students.
Recognize [and Reward] High Performing Schools. States would be required to recognize
and reward schools that make significant and sustained (over 3 years) improvements in the
percentage of students meeting state performance standards. States would have discretion in the
design ofthis approach, including in the size and uses of financial rewards to schools.
Our ESEA reauthorization proposal would set aside 2.5% of Title 1 funds to fund the
requirement for states to intervene in failing schools and reward high performing schools. Your
FY2000 budget requests $200 million to jump start this process by requiring states to begin
interventions in the lowest performing schools immediately.
End Social Promotion. States would be required to end social promotion by adopting (or
requiring local school districts to adopt) policies that (1) require students to meet academic
performance standards at key transition points (e.g., 4th and 8th grade, prior to high school
graduation) before being promoted; (2) uses multiple measures, including a test valid for these
purposes as the primary tool to determine if a student has met the standards; (3) permit other
factors to enter into a final determination as to whether the student has met the standards and
should be promoted.
While requiring students to meet standards sends them an important message that
"performance counts", the more important message in this policy is that schools and school
systems must devise and implement strategies for helping students meet the standards - on
time. States and school districts would be required to show how they will help students meet
promotion standards on time by (1) strengthening learning opportunities in the classroom with
clear standards, small classes with well-prepared teachers, high quality professional
development, use of proven instructional practices, and early identification and intervention for
students who need extra help; (2) providing extended learning time for students who need extra
help, including after-school and summer school; and (4) providing appropriate programs for
students who still do not meet the standards, rather than simply having them repeat an entire
grade.
States would be given five years to phase in this requirement, in order to provide the time
necessary to ensure that adequate learning opportunities are available for all students, and
2
�Automated ReGords ManagemGnt System
Hex-Dump Conversion
especially for those in low perfonning schools and school systems. However, states would have
to commit to this policy, provide a detailed plan for its implementation, and identify annual
implementation milestones in order to receive funding at the beginning of the five year period.
The plan would require the approval ofthe Secretary of Education, who could withhold funding
ifthe state failed to follow through with its implementation plan.
Assume Greater Responsibility for Teacher Quality - and Hold Teachers Accountable for
Performance. As a condition of receiving funding under ESEA, states would be required to:
•
Implement performance-based assessments for initial licensing. States would be
required to develop and implement perfonnance-based assessments for the initial
licensing ofteachers, aligned with student content and perfonnance standards. These
assessments would include written exams of content and teaching knowledge as well as
an evaluation of teaching perfonnance. The assessment ofteaching perfonnance could
take place during a traditional teacher education program or during the first year of
teaching for those who enter the classroom through alternative routes.
•
End the use of unqualified teachers. States would be required to phase out the use of
(1) teachers with emergency rather than full certification and (2) teachers teaching "out of
field". Both of these practices are particularly prevelant in high poverty, low-perfonning
schools, and it will be essential to end them if we are to close achievement gaps, tum
around failing schools, and help students meet promotion and graduation standards.
In addition to these provisions, we are working with the Education Department to develop
additional requirements to strengthen teacher accountability and deal with low-perfonning
teachers. These may include approaches such as requiring periodic recertification of all teachers,
requiring school districts to implement peer review processes for teacher evaluation, or requiring
school districts to adopt procedures for identifying low performing teachers, providing them with
needed help, and removing them fairly and quickly if they do not improve.
3
�Autom[;\ocl Records Management System
Hex-Dump Conversion
Rewarding Success: Education Excellence Fund
The overriding goal of our ESEA proposal is to help all students reach challenging
academic standards, and to close the racial, ethnic and socioeconomic gaps in student
achievement at the same time. The accountability provisions, targeting provisions and program
changes are all designed to work together to accomplish this purpose.
To reward those states, school districts and schools that succeed at this goal, we propose
the establishment of a $500 million per year Education Excellence Fund, which would first
distribute funds in the third year after ESEA is enacted. At this level of funding, states and
districts could receive a level of funding roughly equal to what they receive under Goals 2000 -enough money to be seen as a significant incentive, and to focus national attention on those
places that earn the funds.
The fund would have a simple design:
•
All states and the [100] largest urban school districts [align this with targeting provision
in school modernization proposal] would be eligible to participate, though none would be
required to.
•
In order to participate, states and school districts would be required to participate in
NAEP reading and math on an annual basis, at three grade levels. As is presently the
case, NAEP would be administered to a sample of students in each state or school district.
•
Once a baseline level of performance is established in the first year after ESEA is
enacted, the Secretary would determine for each state and school district annual targets
for increases in the percentage of students meeting NAEP performance standards, as well
as the increased in the percentage of racial, ethnic and socioeconomic subgroups meeting
NAEP performance standards.
•
Any state or school district that reaches its targets over three years would be eligible for
funds under this program. The level of funding would be equal to that state or district's
share of Title I funds. The overall pot of money would be divided on a 50-50 basis
between states and big cities.
•
Funds allocated to states or school districts that choose not to participate or that fail to
reach performance targets would be redistributed to those states and districts that meet
performance targets. Thus, at the outset, every state and district would know the
4
�Au(olTI,,(cd Records Managemont System
Hex-Dump Conversion
minimum level of funding it could receive if it meets performance targets, though it could
receive higher levels depending on the performance of other states and districts.
•
States and districts that receive funds under this program would be required to distribute
90% of the funds to its schools that made the greatest overall achievement gains and did
the most to help close achievement gaps. States and districts would use state and/or
local testing programs for these purposes. Each school would be free to use the funds for
any activity it determines would contribute to additional improvements in student
performance. States and districts would also be free to determine the use of the funds
each could retain.
5
�AutomCl::C! R~\.ords MGnageli1cn! System
flox-Dump Convelsion
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
Bruce Reed
Mike Cohen
SUBJECT:
Reaction to Education Issues in Chris Edley's Memo
Chris Edley's memo argues that the approach we have developed with the Education Department
to strengthening accountability in ESEA focuses on inputs (including a requirement that states
and districts end social promotion) rather than results and lacks teeth. He also argues that our
proposal to require states to end social promotions will alienate progressives, and suggests that
instead ofthese proposals' you pursue the idea of establishing a new and flexible education
funding stream, targeted to high poverty communities, that would remain available to them only
as long as they improve student achievement. As you review these ideas, we ask you to consider
the following:
Our proposal provides strong accountability for results. A summary of our approach to
strengthening accountability for results is attached. In brief, it requires states to set standards,
measure student performance, issue school report cards, identify and reward outstanding schools
and intervene to tum around lowest performing schools. It also requires states to end social
promotion. The required interventions are tough; if schools are not turned around the state must
replace the adults in failed schools, either by reconstituting the school and making wholesale
staff changes, or by closing it down and reopening it with new staff or as a charter school. And
if these changes don't produce improvement in student achievement, the state must take them
again until they do. In our proposal, states must adopt and implement these practices as a
condition of receiving any funds under ESEA. Ifthey fail to do so, or if they are not
implemented in a serious and effective fashion, the Secretary of Education can and should
withhold funds from the state.
This approach to holding schools accountable for results is based on what you have tried
to accomplish for more than a decade, as governor and as president. As last week's Education
Week report shows, these practices are still not nearly as widespread as they should be. Yet
other recent studies show they contribute significantly to the success that states such as North
Carolina and Texas have achieved in boosting student achievement and reducing achievement
gaps attributable to race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status.
Our proposal to end social promotion may well be controversial in some quarters, but it is
sound and will be effective. Our approach requires states to phase in, over five years, an end
to social promotion, thereby squarely focusing the attention of students, teachers, parents and the
entire school system on getting kids to meet standards. The phase-in period will help ensure
high quality implementation, prevent the abuses that Chris fears, and enable states to comply
with civil rights laws addressing use of high stakes tests.
�AutoIilG[~~ Records Managem~n[ Ci'siem .
f :ux-Dump Convorsion
For those who oppose the use oftests to hold students accountable for perfonnance under
almost any circumstance, this requirement will indeed be controversial. However, by coupling
an end to social promotion to other requirements and steps to strengthen learning opportunities in
the classroom, provide extra help to students who need it, end the use of unqualified teachers,
and hold schools and teachers accountable, we can honestly and accurately argue that this policy
will help rather than hann students. Our requirements are designed to foster help for students
who need it, and thereby increase the percentage of students promoted on time, rather than
increase retention rates. This would track your own experience with the 8th grade test in
Arkansas, where passing rates from 1985 to 1988 increased in reading from 85% to 96%, and in
math from 82% to 95%.
If designed well, new funds can be effectively used to reward states, districts and schools
for increased performance. We think a new fund that rewards school systems that make
overall gains in student achievement and close achievement gaps is a good idea. The attached
summary of accountability measures includes a description of how we would approach this.
As we understand Chris Edley's recommendation, he would create a large fund (growing
to approximately $8 billion per year, roughly the same size as Title 1). Funds would be
provided to high poverty communities, which would have virtually complete flexibility in their
use. School systems that do not show gains in student achievement would lose funding. Chris
argues that such an approach is necessary because it is virtually impossible to cut off Title 1
funds, since local recipients see these funds as a virtual entitlement.
Our proposal differs from Chris's in several critical respects. It would be significantly
smaller (perhaps $1 billion over 5 years). While Edley's proposal would give high poverty
communities additional funds they could use to improve achievement, our proposal presumes
that we are already giving these communities funds to improve achievement -- through Title 1,
Class Size Reduction, the Technology Literacy Challenge Program, the Reading Excellence Act,
etc - so that additional funds should be available only to those who are effectively using these
and their own funds to boost achievement. Finally, both Chris and we presume that Title 1 and
other ESEA programs will continue. We propose to significantly strengthen their accountability
provisions, and withhold funds where necessary, while Chris apparently would leave these
untouched.
We agree that in rhetoric and in program design we should heavily stress the need to close
the achievement gap between minority and majority, and between disadvantaged and
advantaged students. We urge caution in framing this as a national goal akin to sending a man
to the moon. We fear this may be seen as no more credible or likely to be reached than the
National Education Goals set in 1990, including becoming first in the world in math and science.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
002. email
DATE
SUBJECTffITLE
Mike Cohen to Michael Cohen et al. at 07:57:03.00 re: Materials for
reponse to POTUS re: Edley [partial] (I page)
01/11/1999
RESTRICTION
P61b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPD ([Kagan])
ONBox Number: 250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[01111/1999]
2009-1006-F
bm79
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - 144 U.S.c. 2204(a)1
Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.c. 5S2(b)]
PI National Security Classified Information l(a)(I) of the PRAI
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office l(a)(2) of the PRAI
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute l(a)(3) of the PRAI
b(l) National security classified information l(b)(I) of the FOIAI
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency l(b)(2) of the FOIAI
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute l(b)(3) of the FOIA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information l(b)(4) of the FOIAI
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy (b)(6) of the FOIA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes l(b)(7) of the FOIAI
b(S) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions (b)(8) of the FOIAI
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells \(b)(9) of the FOIAI
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information l(a)(4) of the PRA]
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors la)(5) of the PRAI
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(a)(6) of the PRAI
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.c.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�• ARMS Email System
Page 1 of 13
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Mike Cohen <mikec_20904@yahoo.com> ( Mike Cohen <mikec_20904@yahoo.com> [ U
CREATION DATE/TlME:11-JAN-1999 07:57:03.00
SUBJECT:
Materials for response to POTUS re:Edley
TO: Michael Cohen
CN=Michael Cohen/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ] )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO]
)
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Bruce N. Reed ( CN=Bruce N. Reed/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ] )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD] )
READ: UNKNOWN
[ oo~J
TEXT:
P6/(b)(6)
Attached are two draft documents. One is a summary of our accountability
proposals, reflecting our meeting on Friday. I've sent a copy to Mike
Smith to make sure he is ok with it, and will check with him as soon as I
get in.
The second is a draft memo to POTUS responding>to the issues Edley raises
in his memo. I envision attaching the accountability document to this
memo, though if that will be too much the memo can be revised accordingly.
I'll touch base as soon as I get in->-page me if you need me before that.
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free ®yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
- newact2.wpd - edleyr.wpd==================== ATTACHMENT
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE:
0 00:00:00.00
1 ====================
TEXT:
Unable to convert ARMS_EXT: [ATTACH.D26]MAIL45006401K.036 to ASCII,
The following is a HEX DUMP:
FF575043C8070000010A02010000000205000000DF3D0000000200OOB3CD2F6E4352C57DFB2AOB
19F432F6DCD45A2A55B1ACEA1A3A9BD51217DC975F14B032C2FB43F3C13D043580BC35136563EA
4 90AA24659160D65DE7E6ADOA52AB762DD2 9113 2 6F51CE2A>897E2 OFB633 592C7EAF2B54 91 763D5
AFA7CCD34450CBAF00824A3AD75B98ED9C419FF95EI070F6CF41AA25E4260FA50061F89137F52E
3A61F206137BD6990336F36F9029C059479EEFBODDA418366EEDDF97234ACA77D6D0A22C14A6CB
7282AE4C601274635F8E1F5AC5641DIFID6D08419FC43A2C1A9CA08E7528C20EB64032FE3EA072
ED88A1306765A008F5797E3C5103E0503B1CFFCA32BC58C2846FODCE40B4F7DEA77873884BE9E4
D14B0935556B8079B8276F5B615769BAF54E8218E7B07513223CEAEE16FB012AIEIBC673FE73BB
C13F7AB39F55E6BCD9139CAE4A64902D353257BOA7D6E175F84961BOCOB647666926820DDB7F9C
�Autcm:tc: R::!cords ~1ana~ei":1~n\ System
flex-Dump Conversion
1110
Strengthening Accountability for Results in ESEA
The 1994 enactment of Goals 2000 and reauthorization of ESEA marked a sea-change in
federal education policy by insisting that states set high standards for all students, measure
student and school progress toward reaching the standards, and by taking the first steps to focus
accountability on achieving results rather than complying with regulations. Our 1999 ESEA
reauthorization proposal will complete this process by establishing a basic framework for holding
states and school districts, schools and teachers, and students accountable for results. It does this
by building on and strengthening provisions already in law and adding new provisions.
Taken together, our approach to strengthening accountability for results would require states to:
Establish High Standards and Aligned Assessments. We would retain provisions of current
law, which require states to establish content and student perfonnance standards and assessments
aligned to the standards by 2000-01 school year. States must also define adequate yearly
progress increases in the percentage of students meeting state perfonnance standards -- for
Title 1 schools and local school districts in a manner that would result in continuous and
substantial progress toward meeting state standards within a reasonable time frame.
Produce and Disseminate School, District and State Report Cards that Focus on Results.
As a condition of receiving ESEA funds, we would require states and school districts to produce
annual report cards, easily understood by and widely distributed to parents and the public, for
each school, school district and the state as a whole. The report cards would include
infonnation on student achievement, teacher quality, school safety, attendance, graduation rates.
Where appropriate the student achievement data would be disaggregated by demographic
subgroups, to allow a greater focus on the gaps between minority and majority, low-income and
In addition, states would be required to publicly identify the lowest
more advantaged students.
perfonning schools, so that parents and community members are aware of the need for
improvement, and so local school boards and school administrators are under immediate pressure
to address the situation.
Title 1 currently requires school and school district profiles, including disaggregated
achievement data. Our proposal strengthens this provision by requiring report cards for all
schools, not just those participating in Title 1, expanding the data to be reported, requiring the
report cards to be widely disseminated, and requiring state level report cards as well.
Take Immediate Corrective Actions to Turn Around the Lowest Performing Schools.
States would be required to identify no more than 5% of its schools as low perfonning, and make
the identification public. These should be the schools with the lowest levels of student
perfonnance which have made little or no improvement over the previous 3 years. States must
take corrective actions in these schools, based on an external audit and which address
1
�'c--"" ,~J
C"/~tem
c.~"....,·.,,,,
AUlljl~:, .... r '''''rrlo • ·l~n~~"·-"·"I[ v'j~
Hox-iJump COnV6iSIJn
l l \ ' ..
.LW'\t.<
fundamental staffing and curricular issues that are fundamental for improved student
performance. Initially, corrective actions will include steps such as provision of extended
learning opportunities, implementation of proven school reform models, and extensive teacher
training. If these actions do not result in satisfactory improvements in student performance
within [2] years, corrective actions must then include steps to replace adults in the school, either
by reconstituting the school and making wholesale staff changes, or by closing the school down
entirely and reopening it with new staff or as a charter schooL Ifthese steps do not work, the state
must repeat them until they do; the Secretary will also have the authority to withhold ESEA
funds provided for state administration. This approach will penalize state officials without taking
funds away from services to students.
Recognize [and Reward] High Performing Schools. States would be required to recognize
and reward schools that make significant and sustained (over 3 years) improvements in the
percentage of students meeting state performance standards. States would have discretion in the
design of this approach, including in the size and uses of financial rewards to schools.
Our ESEA reauthorization proposal would set aside 2.5% of Title 1 funds to fund the
requirement for states to intervene in failing schools and reward high performing schools. Your
FY2000 budget requests $200 million to jump start this process by requiring states to begin
interventions in the lowest performing schools immediately.
End Social Promotion. States would be required to end social promotion by adopting (or
requiring local school districts to adopt) policies that (1) require students to meet academic
performance standards at key transition points (e.g., 4th and 8 th grade, prior to high school
graduation) before being promoted; (2) uses multiple measures, including a test valid for these
purposes as the primary tool to determine if a student has met the standards; (3) permit other
factors to enter into a final determination as to whether the student has met the standards and
should be promoted.
While requiring students to meet standards sends them an important message that
"performance counts", the more important message in this policy is that schools and school
systems must devise and implement strategies for helping students meet the standards - on
time. States and school districts would be required to show how they will help students meet
promotion standards on time by (1) strengthening learning opportunities in the classroom with
clear standards, small classes with well-prepared teachers, high quality professional
development, use of proven instructional practices, and early identification and intervention for
students who need extra help; (2) providing extended learning time for students who need extra
help, including after-school and summer school; and (4) providing appropriate programs for
students who still do not meet the standards, rather than simply having them repeat an entire
grade.
States would be given five years to phase in this requirement, in order to provide the time
necessary to ensure that adequate learning opportunities are available for all students, and
2
�AutOM:~C: recordc MQnugci~::n\ System
fkx-Dump ConvGlslon
especially for those in low performing schools and school systems. However, states would have
to commit to this policy, provide a detailed plan for its implementation, and identify annual
implementation milestones in order to receive funding at the beginning of the five year period.
The plan would require the approval of the Secretary of Education, who could withhold funding
if the state failed to follow through with its implementation plan.
Assume Greater Responsibility for Teacher Quality - and Hold Teachers Accountable for
Performance. As a condition ofreceiving funding under ESEA, states would be required to:
•
Implement performance-based assessments for initial licensing. States would be
required to develop and implement performance-based assessments for the initial
licensing ofteachers, aligned with student content and performance standards. These
assessments would include written exams of content and teaching knowledge as well as
an evaluation of teaching performance. The assessment of teaching performance could
take place during a traditional teacher education program or during the first year of
teaching for those who enter the classroom through alternative routes.
•
End the use of unqualified teachers. States would be required to phase out the use of
(1) teachers with emergency rather than full certification and (2) teachers teaching "out of
field". Both of these practices are particularly prevelant in high poverty, low-performing
schools, and it will be essential to end them if we are to close achievement gaps, tum
around failing schools, and help students meet promotion and graduation standards.
In addition to these provisions, we are working with the Education Department to develop
additional requirements to strengthen teacher accountability and deal with low-performing
teachers. These may include approaches such as requiring periodic recertification of all teachers,
requiring school districts to implement peer review processes for teacher evaluation, or requiring
school districts to adopt procedures for identifying low performing teachers, providing them with
needed help, and removing them fairly and quickly if they do not improve.
3
�Al1t(jm~~~.r: R::rOfc:c ~·1anagcm:ni C)/stem
f icx-l)ump Convc~sj'Jn
Rewarding Success: Education Excellence Fund
The overriding goal of our ESEA proposal is to help all students reach challenging
academic standards, and to close the racial, ethnic and socioeconomic gaps in student
achievement at the same time. The accountability provisions, targeting provisions and program
changes are all designed to work together to accomplish this purpose.
To reward those states, school districts and schools that succeed at this goal, we propose
the establishment of a $500 million per year Education Excellence Fund, which would first
distribute funds in the third year after ESEA is enacted. At this level of funding, states and
districts could receive a level of funding roughly equal to what they receive under Goals 2000 -enough money to be seen as a significant incentive, and to focus national attention on those
places that eam the funds.
The fund would have a simple design:
•
All states and the [iOO] largest urban school districts [align this with targeting provision
in school modernization proposal] would be eligible to participate, though none would be
required to.
•
In order to participate, states and school districts would be required to participate in
NAEP reading and math on an annual basis, at three grade levels. As is presently the
case, NAEP would be administered to a sample of students in each state or school district.
•
Once a baseline level of performance is established in the first year after ESEA is
enacted, the Secretary would determine for each state and school district annual targets
for increases in the percentage of students meeting NAEP performance standards, as well
as the increased in the percentage of racial, ethnic and socioeconomic subgroups meeting
NAEP performance standards.
•
Any state or school district that reaches its targets over three years would be eligible for
funds under this program. The level of funding would be equal to that state or district's
share of Title 1 funds. The overall pot of money would be divided on a 50-50 basis
between states and big cities.
•
Funds allocated to states or school districts that choose not to participate or that fail to
reach performance targets would be redistributed to those states and districts that meet
performance targets. Thus, at the outset, every state and district would know the
4
�\ \11
,... '"
"'Jr('~ :'.1~nr.O{:iTi~nl System
: ,-';:,-uUI11P Conv::;,~i()n
r-' '" -' ,..., "'
minimum level of funding it could receive ifit meets performance targets, though it could
receive higher levels depending on the performance of other states and districts.
•
States and districts that receive funds under this program would be required to distribute
90% of the funds to its schools that made the greatest overall achievement gains and did
the most to help close achievement gaps. States and districts would use state and/or
local testing programs for these purposes. Each school would be free to use the funds for
any activity it determines would contribute to additional improvements in student
performance. States and districts would also be free to determine the use of the funds
each could retain.
5
�MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
Bruce Reed
Mike Cohen
SUBJECT:
Reaction to Education Issues in Chris Edley's Memo
Chris Edley's memo argues that the approach we have developed with the Education Department
to strengthening accountability in ESEA focuses on inputs (including a requirement that states
and districts end social promotion) rather than results and lacks teeth. He also argues that our
proposal to require states to end social promotions will alienate progressives, and suggests that
instead ofthese proposals you pursue the idea of establishing a new and flexible education
funding stream, targeted to high poverty communities, that would remain available to them only
as long as they improve student achievement. As you review these ideas, we ask you to consider
the following:
Our proposal provides strong accountability for results. A summary of our approach to
strengthening accountability for results is attached. In brief, it requires states to set standards,
measure student performance, issue school report cards, identify and reward outstanding schools
and intervene to turn around lowest performing schools. It also requires states to end social
promotion. The required interventions are tough; if schools are not turned around the state must
replace the adults in failed schools, either by reconstituting the school and making wholesale
staff changes, or by closing it down and reopening it with new staff or as a charter school.. And
if these changes don't produce improvement in student achievement, the state must take them
again until they do. In our proposal, states must adopt and implement these practices as a
condition of receiving any funds under ESEA. If they fail to do so, or if they are not
implemented in a serious and effective fashion, the Secretary of Education can and should
withhold funds from the state.
This approach to holding schools accountable for results is based on what you have tried
to accomplish for more than a decade, as governor and as president. As last week's Education
Week report shows, these practices are still not nearly as widespread as they should be. Yet
other recent studies show they contribute significantly to the success that states such as North
Carolina and Texas have achieved in boosting student achievement and reducing achievement
gaps attributable to race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status.
Our proposal to end social promotion may well be controversial in some quarters, but it is
sound and will be effective. Our approach requires states to phase in, over five years, an end
to social promotion, thereby squarely focusing the attention of students, teachers, parents and the
entire school system on getting kids to meet standards. The phase-in period will help ensure
high quality implementation, prevent the abuses that Chris fears, and enable states to comply
with civil rights laws addressing use of high stakes tests.
�For those who oppose the use of tests to hold students accountable for perfonnance under
almost any circumstance, this requirement will indeed be controversial. However, by coupling
an end to social promotion to other requirements and steps to strengthen learning opportunities in
the classroom, provide extra help to students who need it, end the use of unqualified teachers,
and hold schools and teachers accountable, we can honestly and accurately argue that this policy
will help rather than hann students. Our requirements are designed to foster help for students
who need it, and thereby increase the percentage of students promoted on time, rather than
increase retention rates. This would track your own experience with the 8th grade test in
Arkansas, where passing rates from 1985 to 1988 increased in reading from 85% to 96%, and in
math from 82% to 95%.
If designed well, new funds can be effectively used to reward states, districts and schools
for increased performance. We think a new fund that rewards school systems that make
overall gains in student achievement and close achievement gaps is a good idea. The attached
summary of accountability measures includes a description of how we would approach this.
As we understand Chris Edley's recommendation, he would create a large fund (growing
to approximately $8 billion per year, roughly the same size as Title 1). Funds would be
provided to high poverty communities, which would have virtually complete flexibility in their
use. School systems that do not show gains in student achievement would lose funding. Chris
argues that such an approach is necessary because it is virtually impossible to cut off Title 1
funds, since local recipients see these funds as a virtual entitlement.
Our proposal differs from Chris's in several critical respects. It would be significantly
smaller (perhaps $1 billion over 5 years). While Edley's proposal would give high poverty
communities additional funds they could use to improve achievement, our proposal presumes
that we are already giving these communities funds to improve achievement -- through Title 1,
Class Size Reduction, the Technology Literacy Challenge Program, the Reading Excellence Act,
etc - so that additional funds should be available only to those who are effectively using these
and their own funds to boost achievement. Finally, both Chris and we presume that Title 1 and
other ESEA programs will continue. We propose to significantly strengthen their accountability
provisions, and withhold funds where necessary, while Chris apparently would leave these
untouched.
We agree that in rhetoric and in program design we should heavily stress the need to close
the achievement gap between minority and majority, and between disadvantaged and
advantaged students. We urge caution in framing this as a national goal akin to sending a man
to the moon. We fear this may be seen as no more credible or likely to be reached than the
National Education Goals set in 1990, including becoming first inthe world in math and science.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
003. email
DATE
SUBJECTrrlTLE
Mike Cohen to Michael Cohen et al. at 07:58:23.00 re: Materials for
reponse to POTUS re: Edley [partial] (I page)
01/1111999
RESTRICTION
P6/b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPD ([Kagan])
ONBox Number: 250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[01111/1999]
2009-1006-F
bm79
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - 144 U.S.C. 2204(a)1
Freedom of Information Act - 15 U.S.c. 5S2(b)1
PI National Security Classified Information l(a)(1) of the PRAI
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office l(a)(2) of the PRAI
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute l(a)(3) of the PRAI
b(l) National security classified information l(b)(I) of the FOIAI
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency l(b)(2) of the FOIAI
b(3) Release would violate. Federal statute l(b)(3) of the FOIAI
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information l(b)(4) of the FOIAI
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(b)(6) of the FOIAI
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes l(b)(7) of the FOIAI
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions l(b)(8) of the FOIAI
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells l(b)(9) of the FOIAI
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information l(a)(4) of the PRAI
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors la)(5) of the PRAI
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(a)(6) of the PRAI
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�• ARMS Email System
Page 1 of 13
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Mike Cohen <mikec_20904@yahoo.com> ( Mike Cohen <mikec_20904@yahoo.com> [ U
CREATION DATE/TlME:ll-JAN-1999 07:58:23.00
SUBJECT:
Materials for response to POTUS re:Edley
TO: Michael Cohen
CN=Michael Cohen/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ) )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO)
)
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Bruce N. Reed ( CN=Bruce N. Reed/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ) )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: ~lena Kagan
READ: UNKNOWN
( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ) )
,TEXT:
[003.
P6/(b)(6)
Attached are two draft documents. One is a summary of our accountability
proposals, reflecting our meeting on Friday. I've sent a copy to Mike
Smith to make sure he is ok with it, and will check with him as soon as I
get in.
The second is a draft memo to POTUS responding to the issues Edley raises
in his memo. I envision attaching the accountability document to this
memo, though if that will be too much the memo can be revised accordingly.
I'll touch base as soon as I get in--page me if you need me before that.
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free ®yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
- newact2.wpd - edleyr.wpd==================== ATTACHMENT
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE:
0 00:00:00.00
1 ====================
TEXT:
Unable to convert ARMS_EXT: [ATTACH.D43)MAIL47S06401R.036 to ASCII,
The following is a HEX DUMP:
FF575043C8070000010A0201000000020S000000DF3D000000020000B3CD2F6E4352C57DFB2AOB
19F432F6DCD45A2A55B1ACEA1A3A9BD51217DC975F14B032C2FB43F3C13D043580BC35136563EA
490AA24659160D65DE7E6ADOA52AB76~DD2911326F51CE2A897E20FB633592C7EAF2B5491763D5
AFA7CCD34450CBAF00824A3AD75B98ED9C419FF95E1070F6CF41AA25E426OFA50061F89137F52E
3A61F206137BD6990336F36F9029C059479EEFBODDA418366EEDDF97234ACA77D6DOA22C14A6CB
7282AE4C60127463SF8E1F5AC5641D1F1D6D08419FC43A2C1A9CA08E7528C20EB64032FE3EA072
ED88A130676SA008F5797E3C5103E0503B1CFFCA32BC58C2846FODCE40B4F7DEA77873884BE9E4
D14B0935556B8079BB276F5B615769BAF54EB21BE7B07513223CEAEE16FB012A1E1BC673FE73BB
C13F7AB39F55E6BCD9139CAE4A64902D353257BOA7D6E175FB4961BOCOB647666926820DDB7F9C
J
�Automated Records Management System
Hex-Dump Conversion
1110
Strengthening Accountability for Results in ESEA
The 1994 enactment of Goals 2000 and reauthorization of ESEA marked a sea-change in
federal education policy by insisting that states set high standards for all students, measure
student and school progress toward reaching the standards, and by taking the first steps to focus
accountability on achieving results rather than complying with regulations. Our 1999 ESEA
reauthorization proposal will complete this process by establishing a basic framework for holding
states and school districts, schools and teachers, and students accountable for results. It does this
by building on and strengthening provisions already in law and adding new provisions.
Taken together, our approach to strengthening accountability for results would require states to:
Establish High Standards and Aligned Assessments. We would retain provisions of current
law, which require states to establish content and student performance standards and assessments
aligned to the standards by 2000-01 school year. States must also define adequate yearly
progress increases in the percentage of students meeting state performance standards -- for
Title 1 schools and local school districts in a manner that would result in continuous and
substantial progress toward meeting state standards within a reasonable time frame.
Produce and Disseminate School, District and State Report Cards that Focus on Results.
As a condition of receiving ESEA funds, we would require states and school districts to produce
annual report cards, easily understood by and widely distributed to parents and the public, for
each school, school district and the state as a whole. The report cards would include
information on student achievement, teacher quality, school safety, attendance, graduation rates.
Where appropriate the student achievement data would be disaggregated by demographic
subgroups, to allow a greater focus on the gaps between minority and majority, low-income and
more advantaged students.
In addition, states would be required to publicly identify the lowest
performing schools, so that parents and community members are aware of the need for
improvement, and so local school boards and school administrators are under immediate pressure
to address the situation.
Title 1 currently requires school and school district profiles, including disaggregated
achievement data. Our proposal strengthens this provision by requiring report cards for all
schools, not just those participating in Title 1, expanding the data to be reported, requiring the
report cards to be widely disseminated, and requiring state level report cards as well.
Take Immediate Corrective Actions to Turn Around the Lowest Performing Schools.
States would be required to identify no more than 5% of its schools as low performing, and make
the identification public. These should be the schools with the lowest levels of student
performance which have made little or no improvement over the previous 3 years. States must
take corrective actions in these schools, based on an external audit and which address
1
�Automated Records Management System
, Hex-Dump Conversion
fundamental staffing and curricular issues that are fundamental for improved student
performance. Initially, corrective actions will include steps such as provision of extended
learning opportunities, implementation of proven school reform models, and extensive teacher
training. Ifthese actions do not result in satisfactory improvements in student performance
within [2] years, corrective actions must then include steps to replace adults in the school, either
by reconstituting the school and making wholesale staff changes, or by closing the school down
entirely and reopening it with new staff or as a charter school. If these steps do not work, the state
must repeat them until they do; the Secretary will also have the authority to withhold ESEA
funds provided for state administration. This approach will penalize state officials without taking
funds away from services to students.
Recognize [and Reward] High Performing Schools. States would be required to recognize
and reward schools that make significant and sustained (over 3 years) improvements in the
percentage of students meeting state performance standards. States would have discretion in the
design of this approach, including in the size and uses of financial rewards to schools.
Our ESEA reauthorization proposal would set aside 2.5% of Title I funds to fund the
requirement for states to intervene in failing schools and reward high performing schools. Your
FY2000 budget requests $200 million to jump start this process by requiring states to begin
interventions in the lowest performing schools immediately.
End Social Promotion. States would be required to end social promotion by adopting (or
requiring local school districts to adopt) policies that (1) require students to meet academic
performance standards at key transition points (e.g., 4th and 8th grade, prior to high school
graduation) before being promoted; (2) uses multiple measures, including a test valid for these
purposes as the primary tool to d~termine if a student has met the standards; (3) permit other
factors to enter into a final determination as to whether the student has met the standards and
should be promoted.
While requiring students to meet standards sends them an important message that
"performance counts", the more important message in this policy is that schools and school
systems must devise and implement strategies for helping students meet the standards - on
time. States and school districts would be required to show how they will help students meet
promotion standards on time by (1) strengthening learning opportunities in the classroom with
clear standards, small classes with well-prepared teachers, high quality professional
development, use of proven instructional practices, and early identification and intervention for
students who need extra help; (2) providing extended learning time for students who need extra
help, including after-school and summer school; and (4) providing appropriate programs for
students who still do not meet the standards, rather than simply having them repeat an entire
grade.
States would be given five years to phase in this requirement, in order to provide the time
necessary to ensure that adequate learning opportunities are available for all students, and
2
�Automated Records Management System
Hex-Dump Conversion
especially for those in low perfonning schools and school systems. However, states would have
to commit to this policy, provide a detailed plan for its implementation, and identify annual
implementation milestones in order to receive funding at the beginning ofthe five year period.
The plan would require the approval of the Secretary of Education, who could withhold funding
if the state failed to follow through with its implementation plan.
Assume Greater Responsibility for Teacher Quality - and Hold Teachers Accountable for
Performance. As a condition of receiving funding under ESEA, states would be required to:
•
Implement performance-based assessments for initial licensing. States would be
required to develop and implement perfonnance-based assessments for the initial
licensing of teachers, aligned with student content and perfonnance standards. These
assessments would include written exams of content and teaching knowledge, as well as
an evaluation of teaching performance. The assessment of teaching performance could
take place during a traditional teacher education program or during the first year of
teaching for those who enter the classroom through alternative routes.
•
End the use of unqualified teachers. States would be required to phase out the use of
(1) teachers with emergency rather than full certification and (2) teachers teaching "out of
field". Both of these practices are particularly prevelant in high poverty, low-performing
schools, and it will be essential to end them if we are to close achievement gaps, tum
around failing schools, and help students meet promotion and graduation standards.
In addition to these provisions, we are working with the Education Department to develop
additional requirements to strengthen teacher accountability and deal with low-perfonning
teachers. These may include approaches such as requiring periodic recertification of all teachers,
requiring school districts to implement peer review processes for teacher evaluation, or requiring
school districts to adopt procedures for identifying low performing teachers, providing them with
needed help, and removing them fairly and quickly if they do not improve.
3
�Automat3d Records Management System
Hex-Dump Conv6ision
Rewarding Success: Education Excellence Fund
The overriding goal of our ESEA proposal is to help all students reach challenging
academic standards, and to close the racial, ethnic and socioeconomic gaps in student
achievement at the same time. The accountability provisions, targeting provisions and program
changes are all designed to work together to accomplish this purpose.
To reward those states, school districts and schools that succeed at this goal, we propose
the establishment of a $500 million per year Education Excellence Fund, which would first
distribute funds in the third year after ESEA is ehacted. At this level of funding, states and
districts could receive a level of funding roughly equal to what they receive under Goals 2000 -enough money to be seen as a significant incentive, and to focus national attention on those
places that earn the funds.
The fund would have a simple design:
•
All states and the [100] largest urban school districts [align this with targeting provision
in school modernization proposal] would be eligible to participate, though none would be
required to.
•
In order to participate, states and school districts would be required to participate in
NAEP reading and math on an annual basis, at three grade levels. As is presently the
case, NAEP would be administered to a sample of students in each state or school district.
•
Once a baseline level of performance is established in the first year after ESEA is
enacted, the Secretary would determine for each state and school district annual targets
for increases in the percentage of students meeting NAEP performance standards, as well
as the increased in the percentage of racial, ethnic and socioeconomic subgroups meeting
NAEP performance standards.
•
Any state or school district that reaches its targets over three years would be eligible for
funds under this program. The level of funding would be equal to that state or district's
share of Title 1 funds. The overall pot of money would be divided on a 50-50 basis
between states and big cities.
•
Funds allocated to states or school districts that choose not to participate or that fail to
reach performance targets would be redistributed to those states and districts that meet
performance targets. Thus, at the outset, every state and district would know the
4
�Automated Records Managemsnt System
Hex-Dump Conversion
minimum level of funding it could receive if it meets performance targets, though it could
receive higher levels depending on the performance of other states and districts.
•
States and districts that receive funds under this program would be required to distribute
90% ofthe funds to its schools that made the greatest overall achievement gains and did
the most to help close achievement gaps. States and districts would use state and/or
local testing programs for these purposes. Each school would be free to use the funds for
any activity it determines would contribute to additional improvements in student
performance. States and districts would also be free to determine the use of the funds
each could retain.
5
�Automatad Records Management System
. Hex-Dump Conversion
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
Bruce Reed
Mike Cohen
SUBJECT:
Reaction to Education Issues in Chris Edley's Memo
Chris Edley's memo argues that the approach we have developed with the Education Department
to strengthening accountability in ESEA focuses on inputs (including a requirement that states
and districts end social promotion) rather than results and lacks teeth. He also argues that our
proposal to require states to end social promotions will alienate progressives, and suggests that
instead of these proposals you pursue the idea of establishing a new and flexible education
funding stream, targeted to high poverty communities, that would remain available to them only
as long as they improve student achievement. As you review these ideas, we ask you to consider
the following:
Our proposal provides strong accountability for results. A summary of our approach to
strengthening accountability for results is attached. In brief, it requires states to set standards,
measure student performance, issue school report cards, identify and reward outstanding schools
and intervene to tum around lowest performing schools. It also requires states to end social
promotion. The required interventions are tough; if schools are not turned around the state must
replace the adults in failed schools, either by reconstituting the school and making wholesale
staff changes, or by closing it down and reopening it with new staff or as a charter school. And
ifthese changes don't produce improvement in student achievement, the state must take them
again until they do. In our proposal, states must adopt and implement these practices as a
condition of receiving any funds under ESEA. If they fail to do so, or if they are not
implemented in a serious and effective fashion, the Secretary of Education can and should
withhold funds from the state.
This approach to holding schools accountable for results is based on what you have tried
to accomplish for more than a decade, as governor and as president. As last week's Education
Week report shows, these practices are still not nearly as widespread as they should be. Yet
other recent studies show they contribute significantly to the success that states such as North
Carolina and Texas have achieved in boosting student achievement and reducing achievement
gaps attributable to race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status.
Our proposal to end social promotion may well be controversial in some quarters, but it is
sound and will be effective. Our approach requires states to phase in, over five years, an end
to social promotion, thereby squarely focusing the attention of students, teachers, parents and the
entire school system on getting kids to meet standards. The phase-in period will help ensure
high quality implementation, prevent the abuses that Chris fears, and enable states to comply
with civil rights laws addressing use of high stakes tests.
�Autom2t~d R~cords Managem:mt System
Hex-Oump Conversion
For those who oppose the use of tests to hold students accountable for performance under
almost any circumstance, this requirement will indeed be controversial. However, by coupling
an end to social promotion to other requirements and steps to strengthen learning opportunities in
the classroom, provide extra help to students who need it, end the use of unqualified teachers,
and hold schools and teachers accountable, we can honestly and accurately argue that this policy
will help rather than harm students. Our requirements are designed to foster help for students
who need it, and thereby increase the percentage of students promoted on time, rather than
increase retention rates. This would track your own experience with the 8th grade test in
Arkansas, where passing rates from 1985 to 1988 increased in reading from 85% to 96%, and in
math from 82% to 95%.
If designed well, new funds can be effectively used to reward states, districts and schools
for increased performance. We think a new fund that rewards school systems that make
overall gains in student achievement and close achievement gaps is a good idea. The attached
summary of accountability measures includes a description of how we would approach this.
As we understand Chris Edley's recommendation, he would create a large fund (growing
to approximately $8 billion per year, roughly the same size as Title 1). Funds would be
provided to high poverty communities, which would have virtually complete flexibility in their
use. School systems that do not show gains in student achievement would lose funding. Chris
argues that such an approach is necessary because it is virtually impossible to cut off Title 1
funds, since local recipients see these funds as a virtual entitlement.
Our proposal differs from Chris's in several critical respects. It would be significantly
smaller (perhaps $1 billion over 5 years). While Edley's proposal would give high poverty
communities additional funds they could use to improve achievement, our proposal presumes
that we are already giving these communities funds to improve achievement -- through Title 1,
Class Size Reduction, the Technology Literacy Challenge Program, the Reading Excellence Act,
etc - so that additional funds should be available only to those who are effectively using these
and their own funds to boost achievement. Finally, both Chris and we presume that Title 1 and
other ESEA programs will continue. We propose to significantly strengthen their accountability
provisions, and withhold funds where necessary, while Chris apparently would leave these
untouched.
We agree that in rhetoric and in program design we should heavily stress the need to close
the achievement gap between minority and majority, and between disadvantaged and
advantaged students. We urge caution in framing this as a national goal akin to sending a man
to the moon. We fear this may be seen as no more credible or likely to be reached than the
National Education Goals set in 1990, including becoming first in the world in math and science.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
004. email
SUBJECTffITLE
DATE
Mike Cohen to Michael Cohen et al. at 07:58:43.00 re: Materials for
reponse to POTUS re: Edley [partial] (1 page)
0111111999
RESTRICTION
P6/b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPO ([Kagan])
ONBox Number: 250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[0111111999]
2009- 1006-F
bm79
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - 144 U.S.c. 2204(a)1
Freedom ofInformation Act - 15 U.S.c. 552(b)l
PI National Security Classified Information l(a)(I) of the PRAI
b(l) National security classified information l(b)(I) of the FOIAI
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office l(a)(2) of the PRAI
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute l(a)(3) of the PRAI
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information l(a)(4) of the PRAI
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors la)(5) of the PRAI
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(a)(6) of the PRAI
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.c.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
an agency l(b)(2) of the FOIAI
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute l(b)(3) of the FOIAI
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information l(b)(4) of the FOIAI
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(b)(6) of the FOIAI
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes l(b)(7) of the FOIAI
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIAI
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells l(b)(9) of the FOIAI
�ARMS Email System
Page 1 of 13
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Mike Cohen <mikec_20904@yahoo.com> ( Mike Cohen <mikec_20904@yahoo.com> [ U
CREATION DATE/TIME:II-JAN-1999 07:58:43.00
SUBJECT:
Materials for response to POTUS re:Edley
TO: Michael Cohen
CN=Michael Cohen/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ] )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO]
)
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Bruce N. Reed ( CN=Bruce N. Reed/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ] )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=ElenaKagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ] )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
[004.J
P6/(b)(6)
Attached are two draft documents. One is a summary of our accountability
proposals, reflecting our meeting on Friday.
I've sent a copy to Mike
Smith to make sure he is ok with it, and will check with him as soon as I
get in.
The second is a draft memo to POTUS responding to the issues Edley raises
in his memo. I envision attaching the accountability document to this
memo, though if that will be too much the memo can be revised accordingly.
I'll touch base as soon as I get in--page me if you need me before that.
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free ®yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
.- newact2. wpd - edleyr. wpd==================== ATTACHMENT
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE:
0 00:00:00.00
1 ====================
TEXT:
Unable to convert ARMS_EXT: [ATTACH.D45] MAIL44606401X. 036 to ASCII,
The following is a HEX DUMP:
FF575043C8070000010A02010000000205000000DF3D000000020000B3CD2F6E4352C57DFB2AOB
19F432F6DCD45A2A55BIACEAIA3A9BD51217DC975F14B032C2FB43F3C13D0435BOBC35136563EA
490AA24659160D65DE7E6ADOA52AB762DD2911326F51CE2A897E20FB633592C7EAF2B5491763D5
AFA7CCD34450CBAFOOB24A3AD75B98ED9C419FF95EI070F6CF41AA25E4260FA50061F89137F52E
3A61F206137BD6990336F36F9029C059479EEFBODDA418366EEDDF97234ACA77D6D0A22C14A6CB
72B2AE4C601274635FBEIF5AC5641DIFID6D08419FC43A2CIA9CA08E7528C20EB64032FE3EA072
ED8BA1306765A008F5797E3C5103E0503BICFFCA32BC58C2846FODCE40B4F7DEA77873884BE9E4
D14B0935556B8079B8276F5B615769BAF54E821BE7B07513223CEAEEl6FB012AIEIBC673FE73BB
C13F7AB39F55E6BCD9139CAE4A64902D353257BOA7D6E175F84961BOCOB647666926820DDB7F9C
�Autome\:;d Records Management System
~lcx·Dump Conversion
1/10
Strengthening Accountability for Results in ESEA
The 1994 enactment of Goals 2000 and reauthorization of ESEA marked a sea-change in
federal education policy by insisting that states set high standards for all students, measure
student and school progress toward reaching the standards, and by taking the first steps to focus
accountability on achieving results rather than complying with regulations. Our 1999 ESEA
reauthorization proposal will complete this process by establishing a basic framework for holding
states and school districts, schools and teachers, and students accountable for results. It does this
by building on and strengthening provisions already in law and adding new provisions.
Taken together, our approach to strengthening accountability for results would require states to:
Establish High Standards and Aligned Assessments. We would retain provisions of current
law, which require states to establish content and student performance standards and assessments
aligned to the standards by 2000-01 school year. States must also define adequate yearly
progress increases in the percentage of students meeting state performance standards -- for
Title 1 schools and local school districts in a manner that would result in continuous and
substantial progress toward meeting state standards within a reasonable time frame.
Produce and Disseminate School, District and State Report Cards that Focus on Results.
As a condition of receiving ESEA funds, we would require states and school districts to produce
annual report cards, easily understood by and widely distributed to parents and the public, for
each school, school district and the state as a whole. The report cards would include
information on student achievement, teacher quality, school safety, attendance, graduation rates.
Where appropriate the student achievement data would be disaggregated by demographic
subgroups, to allow a greater focus on the gaps between minority and majority, low-income and
In addition, states would be required to publicly identify the lowest
more advantaged students.
performing schools, so that parents and community members are aware of the need for
improvement, and so local school boards and school administrators are under immediate pressure
to address the situation.
Title I currently requires school and school district profiles, including disaggregated
achievement data. Our proposal strengthens this provision by requiring report cards for all
schools, not just those participating in Title 1, expanding the data to be reported, requiring the
report cards to be widely disseminated, and requiring state level report cards as well.
Take Immediate Corrective Actions to Turn Around the Lowest Performing Schools.
States would be required to identify no more than 5% of its schools as low performing, and make
the identification public. These should be the schools with the lowest levels of student
performance which have made little or no improvement over the previous 3 years. States must
take corrective actions in these schools, based on an external audit and which address
I
�Autum: l:,: r,(,:CO[CiS Mnnagemsnt System
Hex-Dump ConvlliSlon
fundamental staffing and curricular issues that are fundamental for improved student
performance_ Initially, corrective actions will include steps such as provision of extended
learning opportunities, implementation of proven school reform models, and extensive teacher
training. If these actions do not result in satisfactory improvements in student performance
within [2] years, corrective actions must then include steps to replace adults in the school, either
by reconstituting the school and making wholesale staff changes, or by closing the school down
entirely and reopening it with new staff or as a charter school. If these steps do not work, the state
must repeat them until they do; the Secretary will also have the authority to withhold ESEA
funds provided for state administration. This approach will penalize state officials without taking
funds away from services to students.
Recognize [and Reward] High Performing Schools. States would be required to recognize
and reward schools that make significant and sustained (over 3 years) improvements in the
percentage of students meeting state performance standards. States would have discretion in the
design of this approach, including in the size and uses of financial rewards to schools.
Our ESEA reauthorization proposal would set aside 2.5% of Title 1 funds to fund the
requirement for states to intervene in failing schools and reward high performing schools. Your
FY2000 budget requests $200 million to jump start this process by requiring states to begin
interventions in the lowest performing schools immediately.
End Social Promotion. States would be required to end social promotion by adopting (or
requiring local school districts to adopt) policies that (1) require students to meet academic
performance standards at key transition points (e.g., 4th and 8th grade, prior to high school
graduation) before being promoted; (2) uses mUltiple measures, including a test valid for these
purposes as the primary tool to determine if a student has met the standards; (3) permit other
factors to enter into a final determination as to whether the student has met the standards and
should be promoted.
While requiring students to meet standards sends them an important message that
"performance counts", the more important message in this policy is that schools and school
systems must devise and implement strategies for helping students meet the standards - on
time. States and school districts would be required to show how they will help students meet
promotion standards on time by (1) strengthening learning opportunities in the classroom with
clear standards, small classes with well-prepared teachers, high quality professional
development, use of proven instructional practices, and early identification and intervention for
students who need extra help; (2) providing extended leaming time for students who need extra
help, including after-school and summer school; and (4) providing appropriate programs for
students who still do not meet the standards, rather than simply having them repeat an entire
grade.
States would be given five years to phase in this requirement, in order to provide the time
necessary to ensure that adequate learning opportunities are available for all students, and
2
�AUtC.11Sl20 R:'!coras r"bnage~:lnt System
Hex-Dump Conversion
especially for those in low performing schools and school systems. However, states would have
to commit to this policy, provide a detailed plan for its implementation, and identify annual
implementation milestones in order to receive funding at the beginning of the five year period.
The plan would require the approval of the Secretary of Education, who could withhold funding
if the state failed to follow through with its implementation plan.
Assume Greater Responsibility for Teacher Quality - and Hold Teachers Accountable for
Performance. As a condition of receiving funding under ESEA, states would be required to:
•
Implement performance-based assessments for initial licensing. States would be
required to develop and implement performance-based assessments for the initial
licensing of teachers, aligned with student content and performance standards. These
assessments would include written exams of content and teaching knowledge as well as
an evaluation of teaching performance. The assessment of teaching performance could
take place during a traditional teacher education program or during the first year of
teaching for those who enter the classroom through alternative routes.
•
End the use of unqualified teachers. States would be required to phase out the use of
(1) teachers with emergency rather than full certification and (2) teachers teaching "out of
field". Both of these practices are particularly prevelant in high poverty, low-performing
schools, and it will be essential to end them if we are to close achievement gaps, tum
around failing schools, and help students meet promotion and graduation standards.
In addition to these provisions, we are working with the Education Department to develop
additional requirements to strengthen teacher accountability and deal with low-performing
teachers. These may include approaches such as requiring periodic recertification of all teachers,
requiring school districts to implement peer review processes for teacher evaluation, or requiring
school districts to adopt procedures for identifying low performing teachers, providing them with
needed help, and removing them fairly and quickly if they do not improve.
3
�AlitOnl2i:;d necords MQnag8m~n! System
Nux-Dump ConV6isiun
Rewarding Success: Education Excellence Fund
The overriding goal of our ESEA proposal is to help all students reach challenging
academic standards, and to close the racial, ethnic and socioeconomic gaps in student
achievement at the same time. The accountability provisions, targeting provisions and program
changes are all designed to work together to accomplish this purpose.
To reward thOse states, school districts and schools that succeed at this goal, we propose
the establishment of a $500 million per year Education Excellence Fund, which would first
distribute funds in the third year after ESEA is enacted. At this level of funding, states and
districts could receive a level of funding roughly equal to what they receive under Goals 2000 -enough money to be seen as a significant incentive, and to focus national attention on those
places that earn the funds.
The fund would have a simple design:
•
All states and the [100] largest urban school districts [align this with targeting provision
in school modernization proposal] would be eligible to participate, though none would be
required to.
•
In order to participate, states and school districts would be required to participate in
NAEP reading and math on an annual basis, at three grade levels. As is presently the
case, NAEP would be administered to a sample of students in each state or school district.
•
Once a baseline level of performance is established in the first year after ESEA is
enacted, the Secretary would determine for each state and school district annual targets
for increases in the percentage of students meeting NAEP performance standards, as well
as the increased in the percentage of racial, ethnic and socioeconomic subgroups meeting
NAEP performance standards.
•
Any state or school district that reaches its targets over three years would be eligible for
funds under this program. The level of funding would be equal to that state or district's
share of Title 1 funds. The overall pot of money would be divided on a 50-50 basis
between states and big cities.
•
Funds allocated to states or school districts that choose not to participate or that fail to
reach performance targets would be redistributed to those states and districts that meet
performance targets. Thus, at the outset, every state and district would know the
4
�Automrl:d Records M;::n::gG;I;~rll Cystem
~:cx-Dump ConvGlsion
minimum level of funding it could receive ifit meets performance targets, though it could
receive higher levels depending on the performance of other states and districts.
•
States and districts that receive funds under this program would be required to distribute
90% of the funds to its schools that made the greatest overall achievement gains and did
the most to help close achievement gaps. States and districts would use state and/or
local testing programs for these purposes. Each school would be free to use the funds for
any activity it determines would contribute to additional improvements in student
performance. States and districts would also be free to determine the use ofthe funds
each could retain.
5
�iMol118icd l~cGords fW(1I1<1gcmCn! S;'stcm
I lex-UlIlnp C(JlIVGISiOIl
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
Bruce Reed
Mike Cohen
SUBJECT:
Reaction to Education Issues in Chris Edley's Memo
Chris Edley's memo argues that the approach we have developed with the Education Department
to strengthening accountability in ESEA focuses on inputs (including a requirement that states
and districts end social promotion) rather than results and lacks teeth. He also argues that our
proposal to require states to end social promotions will alienate progressives, and suggests that·
instead of these proposals you pursue the idea of establishing a new and flexible education
funding stream, targeted to high poverty communities, that would remain available to them only
as long as they improve student achievement. As you review these ideas, we ask you to consider
the following:
Our proposal provides strong accountability for results. A summary of our approach to
strengthening accountability for results is attached. In brief, it requires states to set standards,
measure student performance, issue school report cards, identify and reward outstanding schools
and intervene to tum around lowest performing schools. It also requires states to end social
promotion. The required interventions are tough; if schools are not turned around the state must
replace the adults in failed schools, either by reconstituting the school and making wholesale
staff changes, or by closing it down and reopening it with new staff or as a charter school. And
if these changes don't produce improvement in student achievement, the state must take them
again until they do. In our proposal, states must adopt and implement these practices as a
condition of receiving any funds under ESEA. If they fail to do so, or if they are not
, implemented in a serious and effective fashion, the Secretary of Education can and should
withhold funds from the state.
This approach to holding schools accountable for results is based on what you have tried
to accomplish for more than a decade, as governor and as president. As last week's Education
Week report shows, these practices are still not nearly as widespread as they should be. Yet
other recent studies show they contribute significantly to the success that states such as North
Carolina and Texas have achieved in boosting student achievement and reducing achievement
gaps attributable to race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status.
Our proposal to end social promotion may well be controversial in some quarters, but it is
sound and will be effective. Our approach requires states to phase in, over five years, an end
to social promotion, thereby squarely focusing the attention of students, teachers, parents and the
entire school system on getting kids to meet standards. The phase-in period will help ensure
high quality implementation, prevent the abuses that Chris fears, and enable states to comply
with civil rights laws addressing use of high stakes tests.
.
�"
'
Au(oI11G(CC: 1;C'Gords IJiGIlGQGlilGll( S'/stem
I lex-Dump CUllvGI!;ion
'
For those who oppose the use oftests to hold students accountable for performance under
almost any circumstance, this requirement will indeed be controversial. However, by coupling
an end to social promotion to other requirements and steps to strengthen learning opportunities in
the classroom, provide extra help to students who need it, end the use of unqualified teachers,
and hold schools and teachers accountable, we can honestly and accurately argue that this policy
will help rather than harm students. Our requirements are designed to foster help for students
who need it, and thereby increase the percentage of students promoted on time, rather than
increase retention rates. This would track your own experience with the 8th grade test in
Arkansas, where passing rates from 1985 to 1988 increased in reading from 85% to 96%, and in
math from 82% to 95%.
If designed well, new funds can be effectively used to reward states, districts and schools
for increased performance. We think a new fund that rewards school systems that make
overall gains in student achievement and close achievement gaps is a good idea. The attached
summary of accountability measures includes a description of how we would approach this,
As we understand Chris Edley's recommendation, he would create a large fund (growing
to approximately $8 billion per year, roughly the same size as Title I). Funds would be
provided to high poverty coinmunities, which would have virtually complete flexibility in their
use. School systems that do not show gains in student achievement would lose funding, Chris
argues that such an approach is necessary because it is virtually impossible to cut off Title 1
funds, since local recipients see these funds as a virtual entitlement.
Our proposal differs from Chris's in several critical respects. It would be significantly
smaller (perhaps $1 billion over 5 years). While Edley's proposal would give high poverty
communities additional funds they could use to improve achievement, our proposal presumes
that we are already giving these communities funds to improve achievement -- through Title 1,
Class Size Reduction, the Technology Literacy Challenge Program, the Reading Excellence Act,
etc - so that additional funds should be available only to those who are effectively using these
and their own funds to boost achievement. Finally, both Chris and we presume that Title 1 and
other ESEA programs will continue. We propose to significantly strengthen their accountability
provisions, and withhold funds where necessary, while Chris apparently would leave these
untouched.
We agree that in rhetoric and in program design we should heavily stress the need to close
the achievement gap between minority and majority, and between disadvantaged and
advantaged students. We urge caution in framing this as a national goal akin to sending a man
to the moon. We fear this may be seen as no more credible or likely to be reached than the
National Education Goals set in 1990, including becoming first in the world in math and science.
�ARMS Email System
Page 1 of 1
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: sylvia M. Mathews ( CN=Sylvia M. Mathews/OU=OMB/O=EOP [ OMB 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME: ll-JAN-1999 08:29:20.00
SUBJECT:
List of One Pagers
TO: Elena Kagan
READ:UNKNOWN
CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP@EOP [ OPD 1 )
CC: Beverly J. Barnes ( CN=Beverly J. Barnes/OU=WHO/O=EOP@EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
What am I leaving out Elena?
Enviroment
Health
Education
Urban Issues (do we need this one and the next?)
Rural America
Race
Economy (workforce, exim manufacturing)
Women's Issues
Rand D
National Security/Defense
Crime/Drugs
Disability
promoting Family
Elena have you seen a draft of the SOTU?
That may help as well.
�~ARMS
Page 10f3
Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Paul J. weinstein Jr.
( CN=Paul J. weinstein Jr./OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME: 11-JAN-1999 11:21:43.00
SUBJECT:
FYI - NY Post story on Rangel
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Bruce N. Reed ( CN=Bruce N. Reed/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Elizabeth J. Potter ( CN=Elizabeth J. Potter/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Michael Deich ( CN=Michael Deich/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
Gene B. Sperling ( CN=Gene B. Sperling/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
what is this about?
---------------------- Forwarded by Paul J. Weinstein Jr./OPD/EOP on
01/11/99 11:19 AM ---------------------------
Laura Emmett
01/11/99 08:44:55 AM
Record Type:
Record
To:
Paul J. weinstein Jr./OPD/EOP
cc:
Subject:
FYI - NY Post story on Rangel
fyi
---------------------- Forwarded by Laura Emmett/WHO/EOP on 01/11/99 08:46
AM ---------------------------
Nanda Chitre
01/10/99 03:57:50 PM
Record
Record Type:
To:
Maria Echaveste/WHO/EOP, Jacob J. Lew/OMB/EOP, Janet Murguia/WHO/EOP
cc:
Laura Emmett/WHO/EOP
Subject:
FYI - NY Post story on Rangel
NEWS
RANGEL: BILL WANTS 'EM TO STAY BRONX BOMBERS
By DAVID SEIFMAN
�Page 2 of3
" ARMS Email System
President Clinton favors keeping the Yankees in
The Bronx and using a rejuvenated stadium to
anchor redevelopment of the area, Rep. Charles
Rangel (D-Manhattan) told The Post.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development has prepared a document for Clinton
detailing a number of development plans involving
the House That Ruth Built, including proposals put
forward by Mayor Giuliani, Yankee owner George
Steinbrenner and Bronx Borough President
Fernando Ferrer, Rangel said.
The congressman said Clinton told him Jan. 5,
"We need Yankee Stadium and we need it in The
Bronx. It's a national monument."
He said Clinton also said, "You know the Yankees'
victory has put new gusto into baseball. When you
think about [Mark] McGwire and [Sammy] Sosa
and you think about the whole season, and with
the NBA problems, we need the Yankees."
Last week Rangel met with the president's budget
advisers to discuss including money in the next
federal budget for a Harlem-South Bronx
empowerment zone that would include Yankee
Stadium.
"We're looking at this as not just a city problem,
but that Yankee Stadium is a national landmark
within a federal empowerment zone," Rangel said.
"This goes beyond Yankee Stadium. We're talking
about that whole are_a," he said.
Rangel sponsored a 1993 law that put parts of
Harlem and the South Bronx in an empowerment
zone that would give tax breaks to companies that
build in the area and provide jobs for local
residents.
Because the Stadium is in the zone, any
development there could take advantage of those
breaks.
Clinton is rumored to be considering unveiling a
South Bronx development plan in his State of the
Union Address on Jan. 19, one source said.
The president also may say something about the
Stadium when the Yankees visit the White House
in March to be acknowledged as the World Series
champions, Rangel said. But he added that he
does not know if the president's enthusiasm will
translate into a willingness to commit federal
money.
Clinton is far from advocating a specific plan.
�Page 3 of3
• ARMS Email System
"He wants to support any plan he could with city,
state and private sector support to keep Yankee
Stadium in The Bronx," Rangel said.
Rangel, whose congressional district does not
include the Stadium, stressed that the important
players in the Stadium question are Giuliani,
Steinbrenner, Ferrer and state economic
development chief Charles Gargano.
Ferrer has advocated a "Yankee Village" plan that
calls for renovating the Stadium by adding luxury
boxes and other amenities, revitalizing a
commercial strip nearby, and building a new
Metro-North rail station, 10,500 parking spots and
a regional retail center at the Bronx Terminal
Market.
The mayor's office did not return calls for
comment on the Stadium.
New York magazine reports in this week's issue
that the congressman had dinner with the Boss
the same day he spoke with the president.
"1 hope the president gives [Steinbrenner] an offer
he can't refuse," Rangel told the magazine.
Steinbrenner spokesman Howard Rubenstein told
The Post the Yankees owner is excited by
Clinton's interest but will consider Giuliani's wishes
before committing to any plan.
"The Yankees are certainly pleased that the
president has recognized the national importance
of the South Bronx and the Yankees as a national
treasure.
"This might be a tremendous boost to not only the
Yankees but to housing, transportation and full
economic development of that area," Rubenstein
said.
�ARMS Email System
o.
Page 1 of2
'
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME: 11-JAN-1999 12:38:42.00
SUBJECT:
Tobacco
TO: Cynthia A. Rice
READ:UNKNOWN
( CN=Cynthia A. Rice/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
( CN=Christopher C. Jennings/OU=OPO/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPO 1
TO: Christopher C. Jennings
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Bruce N. Reed ( CN=Bruce N. Reed/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Cathy R. Mays
READ: UNKNOWN
[ OPO 1 )
( CN=Cathy R. Mays/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
TEXT:
---------------------- Forwarded by Laura Emmett/WHO/EOP on 01/11/99 12:37
PM ---------------------------
Dawn v. Woollen
01/11/99 12:33:52 PM
Record Type:
Record
To:
Laura Emmett/WHO/EOP
cc:
Subject:
Tobacco
Attached is the tobacco section in the budget.
Linda Ricci asked me to
let you know that it is largely unchanged (if there are any changes) from
the last version.
Thanks,
Dawn
---------------------- Forwarded by Dawn V. Woollen/OMB/EOP on 01/11/99
12:32 PM ---------------------------
Christopher Ferris
01/11/99 12:24:39 PM
Record Type:
Record
To:
Dawn V. Woollen/OMB/EOP@EOP
cc:
Subject:
Tobacco stuff
Stopping Youth Smoking:
The 1998 State Attorneys General Tobacco
�ARMS Email System
settlement was a step in the right
affirmed its responsibility to pay
tobacco.
But more must be done to
public health. "The Administration
Page 2 of 2
direction, as the tobacco industry
for health care costs caused by
protect our children and preserve
is pursuing a two-pronged approach:
Raise the price of cigarettes, so fewer young people start to smoke.
public health experts agree that the single most effective way to cut
youth smoking is to raise the price of cigarettes: For every 10 cents
additional per pack, estimates show that 270,000 fewer teenagers will
begin smoking over the next five years --and more than 90,000 premature
deaths will be avoided as a result.
Last year, the President called for
an increase of $1.10 per pack (in constant dollars) to help cut youth
smoking in half within five years.
This year, we can build on the
increases already agreed to between the tobacco companies and the states
and those already legislated by the Congress. As a result, we can work
with the Congress and, with a single increase of only half this amount,
reach the target this year.
The funds that result from this policy will cover tobacco-related health
care costs.
Each year, the Federal government spends billions of dollars
treating tobacco-related diseases --in our armed forces, our veterans, and
others.
It is fitting that the tobacco industry reimburse us taxpayers
for these costs, just as it has already agreed to do for the states.
Give the Food and Drug Administration full authority to keep cigarettes
out of the hands of children. The Administration will again propose
legislation that confirms the FDAD,s authority to regulate tobacco
products:
to halt advertising targeted at children, and to make sure that
cigarettes are not sold to them.
Since us taxpayers paid a substantial portion of the Medicaid
costs that were the basis for much of the state settlement with the
tobacco companies, Federal law requires that the Federal government recoup
its share.
However, the Administration will again support legislation to
waive direct Federal recoupment, if states agree to use a portion of funds
from the settlement for programs currently financed by Federal taxpayers.
Tobacco is linked to over 400,000 deaths a year from cancer,
respiratory illness, heart disease, and other health problems. Each year,
a million young people become regular smokers, 300,000 of whom will die
earlier as a result.
The budget includes $61 million of additional funds
for tobacco-related activities in the CDC and the FDA--$27 million of
which will pay for expanding CDC's existing State-based tobacco prevention
activities, and $34 million of which will support FDA's outreach and
enforcement activities.
�ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
Page 1 of 1
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Cathy R. Mays ( CN;Cathy R. Mays/OU;OPD/O;EOP [ OPD 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME:11-JAN-1999 12:43:54.00
SUBJECT:
Education Meeting
TO: Bruce N. Reed ( CN;Bruce N. Reed/OU;OPD/O;EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN;Elena Kagan/OU;OPD/O=EOP
READ: UNKNOWN
@
EOP [ OPD 1" )
TEXT:
FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Cathy R. Mays/OPD/EOP on 01/11/99
12:43 PM ---------------------------
Karin Kullman
01/11/99 12:20:38 PM
Record Type:
Record
To:
Marjorie Tarmey/WHO/EOP, Cathy R. Mays/OPD/EOP
cc:
Subject:
Education Meeting
Just before Stephanie saw the President this morning, she ran into Maria
and they discussed the Education Meeting.
Maria told Stephanie that we should not do it without Riley (and he can't
be there tomorrow), and that it should just be submitted by paper.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
005. email
DATE
SUBJECTrrlTLE
Thomas Freedman to Elena Kagan et al. re: The Box (1 page)
0111111999
RESTRICTION
P61b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPO ([Kagan])
OAIBox Number: 250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[0111111999)
2009· J 006·F
bm79
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act· 144 U.S.c. 2204(a)1
Freedom of Information Act· 15 U.S.c. 552(b)J
PI National Security Classified Information l(a)(I) of the PRAI
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office l(a)(2) of the PRAI
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute l(a)(3) of the PRAI
b(l) National security classified information l(b)(I) of the FOIAI
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency l(b)(2) of the FOIAI
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute l(b)(3) of the FOIAI
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information l(a)(4) of the PRAI
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors la)(5) of the PRAI
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(a)(6) of the PRAI
c. Closed in
accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.c.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information l(b)(4) of the FOIAI
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(b)(6) of the FOIAI
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes l(b)(7) of the FOIAI
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions l(b)(8) of the FOIAI
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells l(b)(9) of the FOIAI
�..
Page 1 on
- -- .... ARMS Email System
-
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Jennifer M. Palmieri ( CN=Jennifer M. Palmieri/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME:11-JAN-1999 13:40:11.00
SUBJECT:
REMINDER: 2:30 PM SOTU/BUDGET PRESS ROLL-OUT MEETING
TO: Mark D. Neschis ( CN=Mark D. Neschis/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Beverly J. Barnes ( CN=Beverly J. Barnes/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Christopher S. Lehane ( CN=Christopher S. Lehane/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Shirley S. Sagawa
READ:UNKNOWN
CN=Shirley S. Sagawa/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 }
TO: Jennifer N. Devlin ( CN=Jennifer N. Devlin/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Antony J. Blinken ( CN=Antony J. Blinken/OU=NSC/O=EOP @ EOP [ NSC.l
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Cynthia A. Rice ( CN=Cynthia A. Rice/oU=OPD/O=EOP
READ: UNKNOWN
)
@ EOP [ OPD 1 )
TO: Jose Cerda III ( CN=Jose Cerda III/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
. READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Elizabeth R. Newman ( CN=Elizabeth R. Newman/OU=WHO/O=EOP' @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Janet Murguia ( CN=Janet Murguia/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Tracey E. Thornton ( CN=Tracey E. Thornton/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Amy Weiss ( CN=Amy Weiss/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Linda Ricci
READ: UNKNOWN
( CN=Linda Ricci/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB 1 )
TO: Robert B. Johnson ( CN=Robert B. Johnson/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Tracy Pakulniewicz ( CN=Tracy pakulniewicz/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Stacie Spector ( CN=Stacie Spector/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Patricia M. Ewing ( CN=Patricia M. Ewing/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN 1 )
�I.
Page 2 of2
ARMS Email System
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Julie E. Mason ( CN=Julie E. MasonjOU=WHojO=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Matt Gobush ( CN=Matt GobushjOU=NSCjO=EOP @ EOP [ NSC 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Sarah A. Bianchi ( CN=Sarah A. BianchijO=OVP @ OVP [UNKNOWN 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Katharine Button ( CN=Katharine ButtonjOU=WHOjO=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Christopher C. Jennings
READ: UNKNOWN
( CN=Christopher C. JenningsjOU=OPO/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPO 1
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena KaganjOU=OPDjO=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Jonathan Orszag ( CN=Jonathan OrszagjOU=OPDjO=EOP
READ:UNKNOWN
@
EOP o[ OPD 1 )
TO: Charles M. Brain ( CN=Charles M. BrainjOU=WHOjO=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Barry J. Toiv ( CN=Barry J. Toiv/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jake Siewert ( CN=Jake Siewert/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP
READ: UNKNOWN
[ OPD 1 )
TO: Janet L. Graves ( CN=Janet L. Graves/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
2:30 PM SOTU/BUDGET PRESS ROLL-OUT MEETING IN ROOSEVELT ROOM.
�ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
Page 1 of 1
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Phillip Caplan ( CN=Phillip Caplan/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME: 11-JAN-1999 13:44:49.00
SUBJECT:
Edley memo
TO: Sally Katzen ( CN=Sally Katzen/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Shannon Mason ( CN=Shannon Mason/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Can I get the cover note to the memo as soon as possible, please.
Thanks.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
006. email
SUBJECTrrlTLE
DATE
Sylvia Mathews to Elena Kagan and Beverly Barnes re: List of One
Pagers (I page)
0111111999
RESTRICTION
P61b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPO ([Kagan])
ONBox Number: 250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[01111/1999]
2009-1006-F
bm79
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - (44 U.S.c. 2204(a)1
Freedom of Information Act - (5 U.S.c. 552(b)1
PI
P2
P3
P4
b(l) National security classified information (b)(I) of the FOIAI
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency l(b)(2) of the FOJAI
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute ](b)(3) of the FOJAI
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information (b)(4) of the FOJAI
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy (b)(6) of the FOIAI
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes (b)(7) of the FOJAI
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions (b)(8) of the FOIAI
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells l(b)(9) of the FOIAI
National Security Classified Information (a)(l) of the PRAI
Relating to the appointment to Federal office (a)(2) of the PRAI
Release would violate a Federal statute (a)(3) of the PRAI
Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information (a)(4) of the PRAI
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors (a)(5) of the PRAI
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(a)(6) of the PRAI
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.c.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
Page 1 of 1
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Shannon M. Hinderliter ( CN=Shannon M. Hinderliter/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME:11-JAN-1999 14:20:04.00
SUBJECT:
NARAL
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP
READ: UNKNOWN
[ OPD 1 )
TEXT:
Melanne Verveer has asked that you clear the following message for us. It
is to be printed in the dinner journal, and the First Lady is speaking at
the event. Please note-they need the message later today for printing
purposes. If you have any questions I can be reached at 6-5526. Thank you.
I am pleased to congratulate the members of NARAL as
you celebrate your organization's 30th anniversary.
You can look back with pride on three decades of action
and accomplishment in the struggle to defend the right to
choose.
From the grassroots level to the halls of Congress,
NARAL members have stepped forward with courage and conviction
to promote policies that protect the lives and health. of women
and ensure their reproductive freedom and dignity.
Working together, we have made real progress in our goal
to make abortion safe, legal, accessible, and rare.
Early in
my Administration, I restored Medicaid funding for abortion in
cases of rape, incest, and life endangerment; stopped all proceedings on the "gag rule" that prevented women from discussing
abortion with health professionals; reversed the Mexico City
policy; and signed into law the Freedom of Access to Clinic
Entrances Act to protect women's health care centers from
violence.
In all of these achievements, your leadership
and support played a prominent role.
As we mark this milestone in the history of NARAL and
the 26th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, let us reaffirm our commitment to preserving the freedom, safety, and health of all
our citizens, and let us look forward to the day when every
child in America is a wanted child, raised in a strong, loving
family.
Hillary joins me in extending best wishes for a memorable
anniversary celebration.
�ARMS Email System
Page 1 of 1
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
CREATOR: Cathy R. Mays
(NOTES MAIL)
( CN=Cathy R. Mays/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME: 11-JAN-1999 14:32:58.00
SUBJECT:
TODAY'S STRATEGY MEETING
TO: Leanne A. Shimabukuro ( CN=Leanne A. Shimabukuro/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Amy Weiss ( CN=Amy Weiss/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Charles A. Blanchard ( CN=Charles A. Blanchard/OU=ONDCP/O=EOP @ EOP [ ONDCP 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jose Cerda III ( CN=Jose Cerda III/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Michael Deich ( CN=Michael Deich/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP[ OMB 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Jason H. Schechter ( CN=Jason H. Schechter/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Essence P. Washington ( CN=Essence P. Washington/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Patricia E. Romani
READ:UNKNOWN
( CN=Patricia E. Romani/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB 1 )
TEXT:
The 3:00 CRIME STRATEGY MEETING FOR TODAY IS CANCELLED.
�Page 1 of5
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Cynthia A. Rice ( CN=Cynthia A. Rice/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ] )
CREATION DATE/TIME:II-JAN-1999 15:36:45.00
SUBJECT:
Edits to OMB's tobacco write-up
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ] )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Bruce N.Reed ( CN=Bruce N. Reed/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ] )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP
READ:UNKNOWN
[ WHO]
)
CC: J. Eric Gould ( CN=J. Eric Gould/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ] )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Cathy R. Mays ( CN=Cathy R. Mays/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ] )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Thomas L. Freedman ( CN=Thomas L. Freedman/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ] )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Here's my effort to edit OMB's tobacco. budget section -- I'm still not
sure it strikes the right tone.
In particular, how do you want to
describe the price increase? Do you want to say it will enable us to cut
youth smoking in half? I edited that and other parts out to tone it down
a bit.
Also, do you want the Medicare suit in there?
I added it.
I also took a
stab at farmers.
I'll tell Linda Ricci we're working on it.
==================== ATTACHMENT
1 ====================
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE:
0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
Unable to convert ARMS EXT: [ATTACH.D3]MAIL450192112.036 to ASCII,
The following is a HEX DUMP:
FF575043CE060000010A0201000000020500000048260000000200001EB5E5E3598756404B87CB
49363D79B9288E5BFEB4EF26483D9C3645B9E10C69C7E5F82E48D7E7BBE0875D2BD69DC75AF399
OCEC7DC2AB95D577432204C9793B17C91D30F44D8C90D7BAC1769CCF2DAE58802C39F51E17E5DB
E1C6D56602FF8C9CA7569AOBB346C5C36615A50F6B1A6453FDF135D96A02450E19E34C5AD7D405
99441562235869B07008FD3A4327C34907AD3D26D47D76D9DDA152ABA4914069349610BD523F50
E81ADFOOE19572C8E4E99823C2550BB2440003AEAC6FE9167202229F86A93462F985AOA1AC4CAD
63442EF24F225A8363A5DA6A8842E62185676171261B84E9DBD4956B1F17C661602A14053C33FC
9DBCF4620D3C7F2DA8320928D14D2BE2F3EAEAEB81CE97477E5165694379DAOB232C04443818B6
882AB76FBB501FCF5B6E5B5445D2FD2A85C656F2F476EFIA7ABD03A2C031A548DF8485ACA4AAE6
75B438729151775F2F7D29FD042A64BD4F14D6F7FAE3ECCBE8920249005D8CCC39F9B9CB9155E7
C9DB63AOF07B4BC391A38AC6A7962A43F2CCOB07924FF81D96A0916EA96A276D60B18C8527F7AC
D29C524F8A313E8495B5D55ED31807DD6C399660499E6FCD3C4F142FAF6131C7F74743CBE2BECB
0068CE973E4A46EOBE3D65E99A9FF83DC765BBF79D138C9755198021D45F156CC28D8612D91950
0310299CAD02002000000000000000000000000823010000000BOI0000C003000000550EOOOOOO
4EOOOOOOCB04000009250100000006000000190500000B3002000000280000001F050000087701
000000400000004705000008340100000014000000870500000802010000000F0000009B050000
08050100000008000000AA050000081DOI00000000000000B20500000055010000003COOOOOOB2
05000000000000000000000000B205000000550800000032000000EE0500000055020000003200
�Automated Records Management System
Hex-Dump Conversion
Stopping Youth Smoking:
Every day, 3,000 children become regular smokers and 1,000 have
their lives shortened because of it. Almost 90 percent of adult smokers began smoking by age
18 and today, 4.5 million children aged 12 to 17 -- 37 percent of all high school students -smoke cigarettes. Tobacco is linked to over 400,000 deaths a year from cancer, respiratory
illness, heart disease and other problems. To end this public health crisis, we must have a
focused public health effort to reduce youth smoking. The 1998 State Attorneys GeReral Tobacco
S state tobacco settlement was an important step in the right direction, as the tobacco iRdHstry
affirmed its respoRsibility to pay for health care costs caHsed by tobacco. but more must be
done to protect our children and preserve pHblic health hold the tobacco industry accountable.
The Administration is PHrsHiRg a two proRged approach believes a few key additional steps to
reduce youth smoking must be taken at the national level:
Raise the price of cigarettes, so fewer young people start to smoke.
PHblic health experts agree
that the siRgle most effective 'Nay to CHt YOHth smokiRg is to raise the price of cigarettes:
For every 10 ceRts adElitioRal per pack, estimates show that 270,000 fewer teeRagers wiIJ
begiR smokiRg O'ier the Rext five years aRd more thaR 90,000 prematlire deaths will be
avoided as a resHIt. Last year, the President called for an increase of $1.10 per pack (in
constant dollars) to help cut youth smoking iR half 'NithiR five years. This year, we caR
build on the increases already agreed to between the tobacco companies and the states and
those already legislated by the Congress and As a res Hit, we caR work with the CORgress aRd,
with a siRgle propose an increase of only half this amount. reach the target this year.
The funds that result from this policy will cover tobacco-related health care costs. Each year,
the Federal government spends billions of dollars treating tobacco-related dis~ases --ill for our
armed forces, our veterans, and our federal employees otRers. It is fitting that the tobacco
industry reimburse US taxpayers for these costs, just as it has already agreed to do for the
states .
.GAze Reaffirm the Food and Drug Administration!i fuD authority to keep cigarettes out of the
hands of children and support critical public health efforts to prevent youth smoking. The
Administration will again propose legislation that confirms the FDA's authority to regulate
tobacco products: to halt advertising targeted at children, and to make sure that cigarettes are
not sold to them. To help curb youth access to tobacco products and support tobacco
prevention programs in states and local communities, the Administration's budget will
double the funding for the Food and Drug Administration's tobacco budget to $68 million and
increase funding for the Centers for Disease Control's tobacco control efforts by one-third,
from $73 to $100 million. Moreover, the Administration will continue to support measures
to hold the tobacco industry accountable for reducing youth smoking.
Proted farmers and farming communities.
The Administration is committed to working with
all parties to protect tobacco farmers and their communities, and will monitor closely
on-going efforts by the states and private industry should additional actions be needed.
�Automated Records Manage~ent System
Hex-Dump Conversion
Since US taxpayers paid a substantial portion of the Medicaid costs that were the basis for
much of the state settlement with the tobacco companies, Federal law requires that the Federal
government recoup its share. However, the Administration 'Nill agaiR support legislatioR to
waive direct l'ederal recoupmeRt, if states agree to use a POrtiOR of f<lAds from the settlemeat for
programs curreRtly HRaRced by l'ederal taxpayers. is open to working with the states to enact
tobacco legislation that, among other things, resolves these federal claims in exchange for a
commitment by the states to use tobacco money for specified activities including public health
and children's programs.
In addition to these Medicaid costs, tobacco-related health problems have cost the
Medicare program billions of dollars over the last three decades. To recover these losses,
the U.S. Department of Justice intends to bring suit against the tobacco industry, and the
new FY 2000 budget will contain $20 million to pay for the necessary legal costs. All
recoveries will be used to preserve and protect Medicare for future generations.
Tebaeee is linkea te e'.'er 400,000 aeaths a year Hom eaneer, respiratel)' illness, heart
. disease, and ether health preblems. Eaeh year, a millien YOURg people beeeme regular smekers,
300,000 ofwhem vAll die earlier as a result. The budget ineludes $61 miUioR of additional
funds fer tebaeee related aeti'lities in the CDC and the PDA $27 millioR ofwhieh 'Nill pay fer
expaadiHg CDC's eRisting State based tobaeee pre'feRtion aeti'lities, and $34 millien efvihieh
will Stlpport PDA's etltreaeh aHd eHfereemeHt aeti'lities.
�ARMS Email System
Page 1 of 1
'\
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Michael Waldman ( CN=Michael Waldman/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME: 11-JAN-1999 16:11:04.00
SUBJECT:
fyi
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP
READ: UNKNOWN
[ OPD 1 )
TO: Bruce N. Reed ( CN=Bruce N. Reed/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
.,. I had stopped the recorder & even rewound during both those naughty
bits you were concerned about.
�Page 1 of2
ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Maria Echaveste ( CN;Maria Echaveste/OU;WHO/O;EOP [ WHO 1
CREATION DATE/TIME: 11-JAN-1999 16:19:00.00
SUBJECT:
NC9052:
TO: Minyon Moore
READ: UNKNOWN
'Jose' moves into top spot for baby names in California
( CN;Minyon Moore/OU=WHO/O;EOP @ EOP [ WHO
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN;Elena Kagan/OU;OPD/O;EOP @ EOP
READ: UNKNOWN
[ OPD 1
TO: edley ( edley @ law.harvard.edu @ inet [ UNKNOWN 1
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
FYI--the following news story made me laugh--I just don't know what it
means for our country.
---------------------- Forwarded by Maria Echaveste/WHO/EOP on 01/11/99
04:18 PM ---------------------------
Richard Socarides
Record Type:
01/11/99 11:30:55 AM
Record
To:
Maria Echaveste/WHO/EOP
cc:
NC9052: 'Jose' moves into top spot for baby names in California
Subject:
---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Socarides/WHO/EOP on 01/11/99
11:32 AM ---------------------------
rwockner @ netcom.com
01/09/99 02:00:00 AM
Record Type: Record
To: Stuart D. Rosenstein, Richard Socarides
cc:
Subject: NC9052: 'Jose' moves into top spot for baby names in California
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
This item is copyrighted. Do not print it without permission from the
originating media operation. Do not post this item in a public online
forum. Items on this mailing list that are not copyrighted will not
contain this message. This free mailing list is open only to my friends.
It has 210 recipients.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
LOS ANGELES, Jan 8 (AFP) - The Spanish name Jose became the most
popular name in 1998 in California and Texas, two of the biggest
states in the country, the Los Angeles Times reported Friday.
The name reflects the burgeoning Hispanic populations in those
states, who are now more likely to cling to their heritage than
adopt Anglicized names as waves of previous immigrants did.
�•
ARMS Email System
Page 2 of2
The shift is all the more notable in a country that predictably
rotated John, Robert, James, Michael and David at the top of the
list of boys' most popular names for nearly a century.
"Thirty years ago, most people would not have given their child
an ethnic name," said Edward Callary, an English professor at
Northern Illinois University and editor of the American Name
Society's journal.
"A lot of folks tried to blend in and fold into American society
as quickly as they could," Callary told the Times.
The popularity of the name Jose is more than just a reflection
of a growing Hispanic population, he said. It also shows that this
population is more comfortable with showing its ethnicity.
Michael Shackleford, the Social Security Administration actuary
who compiled the list, said when he saw that Jose topped the list of
names "it was a little bit of shock," though it made sense.
Following Jose in terms of popularity in California were the
more traditional names of Daniel, Michael, Anthony and Jacob.
The most popular girls' names were Jessica, Ashley, Emily,
Jennifer and Samantha.
==================== ATTACHMENT
1 ====================
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE:
0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
RFC-822-headers:
Received: from conversion.pmdf.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-9 #29131)
id <01J6BJ4H6UTS001ET6@PMDF.EOP.GOV>; Sat, 9 Jan 1999 02:02:22 EST
Received: from storm.eop.gov by PMDF.EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.1-9 #29131)
with ESMTP id <01J6BJ4FQ2Q0001MPK@PMDF.EOP.GOV>; Sat,
09 Jan 1999 02:02:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from netcom18.netcom.com ([192.100.81.131])
by EOP.GOV (PMDF V5.2-29 #34437) with ESMTP id <01J6BJ3RJ862001ITC@EOP.GOV>;
Sat, 09 Jan 1999 02:01:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from rwockner@localhost)
by netcom18.netcom.com (8.8.5-r-beta/8.8.5/(NETCOM v1.02»
id XAA23736; Fri,
08 Jan 1999 23:00:57 -0800 (PST)
================== END ATTACHMENT
1 ==================
�Page 1 of2
ARMS Email System
J.
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Clara J. Shin ( CN=Clara J. Shin/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME: 11-JAN-1999 16:28:31.00
SUBJECT:
Promosing Practices Compendium
TO: Beverly J. Barnes ( CN=Beverly J. Barnes/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Karen Tramontano ( CN=Karen Tramontano/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Gene B. Sperling ( CN=Gene B. Sperling/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Bob J. Nash ( CN=Bob J. Nash/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP
READ:UNKNOWN
[ WHO 1 )
TO: Thurgood Marshall Jr ( CN=Thurgood Marshall Jr/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Mickey Ibarra ( CN=Mickey Ibarra/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Steve Ricchetti
READ:UNKNOWN
( CN=Steve Ricchetti/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
TO: Richard Socarides ( CN=Richard Socarides/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Robert B. Johnson ( CN=Robert B. Johnson/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lawrence J. Stein ( CN=Lawrence J. Stein/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Bruce N. Reed ( CN=Bruce N. Reed/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Minyon Moore ( CN=Minyon Moore/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Ann F. Lewis ( CN=Ann F. Lewis/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Jacob J. Lew ( CN=Jacob J. Lew/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: John Podesta ( CN=John Podesta/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Jena V. Roscoe ( CN=Jena V. Roscoe/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Melissa G. Green ( CN=Melissa G. Green/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
�ARMS Email System
Page 2 of2
'.
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Jocelyn A. Bucaro ( CN=Jocelyn A. Bucaro/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Ruby Shamir ( CN=Ruby Shamir/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Maria E. Soto ( CN=Maria E. Soto/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Rebecca L. Walldorff ( CN=Rebecca L. Walldorff/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Jessica L. Gibson ( CN=Jessica L. Gibson/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Laura K. Demeo ( CN=Laura K. Demeo/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Maya Seiden ( CN=Maya Seiden/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Scott R. Hynes ( CN=Scott R. Hynes/O=OVP @ OVP [ UNKNOWN 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Robert L. Nabors (CN=Robert L. Nabors/OU=OMB/O=EOP @ EOP [ OMB 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Kevin S. Moran ( CN=Kevin S. Moran/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
A reminder that comments re: the Promising Practices Compendium are due in
by 4:30 tomorrow. The earlier the better, however, as we are attempting
to expedite the printing process.
The President will be annoucing the
Compendium in his radio address this Saturday. Thank you and do not
hesitate to contact me with any questions.
�ARMS Email System
Page 1 of 5
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Sean P. Maloney ( CN=Sean P. Maloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME: 11-JAN-1999 17:35:21.00
SUBJECT:
The President's Trip to NY
TO: Bridget T. Leininger ( CN=Bridget T. Leininger/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Paul D. Glastris ( CN=Paul D. Glastris/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Lowell A. Weiss
READ:UNKNOWN
( CN=Lowell A. Weiss/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
TO: Wesley P. Warren ( CN=Wesley P. Warren/OU=CEQ/O=EOP @ EOP [ CEQ 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Karen Tramontano ( CN=Karen Tramontano/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Steve Ricchetti ( CN=Steve Ricchetti/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Janet Murguia ( CN=Janet Murguia/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: George T. Frampton ( CN=George T. Frampton/OU=CEQ/O=EOP @ EOP [ CEQ 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Dominique L. Cano ( CN=Dominique L. Cano/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sidney Blumenthal ( CN=Sidney Blumenthal/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Malcolm R. Lee ( CN=Malcolm R. Lee/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Lawrence J. Stein ( CN=Lawrence J. Stein/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Robert S. Kapla ( CN=Robert S. Kapla/OU=CEQ/O=EOP @ EOP [ CEQ 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Craig Hughes
READ: UNKNOWN
( CN=Craig Hughes/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
TO: Phillip Caplan (
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jon P. Jennings
READ:UNKNOWN
CN~Phillip
Caplan/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
CN=Jon P. Jennings/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
TO: Paul J. Weinstein Jr.
READ:UNKNOWN
( CN=Paul J. weinstein Jr./OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
TO: Christopher Wayne ( CN=Christopher Wayne/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
�Page 2 of5
ARMS Email System
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Beth A. Viola ( CN=Beth A. Viola/OU=CEQ/O=EOP @ EOP [ CEQ 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Michael V. Terrell ( CN=Michael V. Terrell/OU=CEQ/O=EOP @ EOP [ CEQ 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jordan Tamagni
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Aviva Steinberg
READ: UNKNOWN
CN=Jordan Tamagni/OU=WHO/O=EOP
@
EOP [ WHO 1 .)
CN=Aviva Steinberg/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
TO: Jake Siewert ( CN=Jake Siewert/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Dan K. Rosenthal
READ: UNKNOWN
( CN=Dan K. Rosenthal/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
TO: John Podesta ( CN=John Podesta/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Jennifer M. Palmieri ( CN=Jennifer M. Palmieri/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Mary Morrison ( CN=Mary Morrison/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Minyon Moore
READ:UNKNOWN
( CN=Minyon Moore/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
TO: Megan C. Moloney ( CN=Megan C. Moloney/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Andrew J. Mayock ( CN=Andrew J. Mayock/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Bruce R. Lindsey ( CN=Bruce R. Lindsey/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Christopher J. Lavery ( CN=Christopher J. Lavery/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP
READ: UNKNOWN
[ WHO 1 )
TO: Karin Kullman ( CN=Karin Kullman/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Phu D. Huynh ( CN=phu D. Huynh/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Laura A. Graham ( CN=Laura A. Graham/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Anne M. Edwards ( CN=Anne M. Edwards/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Brenda B. Costello ( CN=Brenda B. Costello/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
�Page 3 0[5
ARMS Email System
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Carolyn E. Cleveland ( CN=Carolyn E. Cleveland/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Debra D. Bird ( CN=Debra D. Bird/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Kris M Balderston ( CN=Kris M Balderston/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: David R. Goodfriend ( CN=David R. Goodfriend/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: June Shih ( CN=June Shih/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Amy Weiss
READ: UNKNOWN
( CN=Amy Weiss/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1")
TO: Marjorie Tarmey ( CN=Marjorie Tarmey/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Catherine R. Pacific ( CN=Catherine R. Pacific/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP
READ:UNKNOWN
[ WHO 1 )
TO: Joshua S. Gottheimer ( CN=Joshua S. Gottheimer/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Fred DuVal
READ:UNKNOWN
( CN=Fred DuVal/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
TO: Charles M. Brain ( CN=Charles M. Brain/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Paul E. Begala ( CN=Paul E. Begala/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Maria E. Soto ( CN=Maria E. Soto/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Ryland M. willis ( CN=Ryland M. willis/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Julianne B. Corbett ( CN=Julianne B. Corbett/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Jonathan Orszag ( CN=Jonathan Orszag/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Cecily C. Williams ( CN=Cecily C. Williams/OU;WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Dorian V. Weaver ( CN=Dorian V. Weaver/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Michael Waldman ( CN=Michael Waldman/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Barry J. Toiv ( CN=Barry J. Toiv/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
�ARMS Email System
Page 4 of5
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Stephanie S. Streett ( CN=Stephanie S. Streett/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Todd Stern ( CN=Todd Stern/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Laura O. Schwartz ( CN=Laura O. Schwartz/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Christa Robinson ( CN=Christa Robinson/OU=OPO/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Simeona F. pasquil ( CN=Simeona F. Pasquil/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elizabeth R. Newman ( CN=Elizabeth R. Newman/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kevin S. Moran ( CN=Kevin S. Moran/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Linda L. Moore ( CN=Linda L. Moore/OU=WHO/O=EOP
READ: UNKNOWN
@
EOP· [ WHO 1 )
TO: Anne E. McGuire ( CN=Anne E. McGuire/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Joseph P. Lockhart ( CN=Joseph P. Lockhart/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Ann F. Lewis ( CN=Ann F. Lewis/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Sara M. Latham ( CN=Sara M. Latham/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Kirk T. Hanlin ( CN=Kirk T. Hanlin/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Cynthia M. Jasso-Rotunno ( CN=Cynthia M. Jasso-Rotunno/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Nancy V. Hernreich ( CN=Nancy V. Hernreich/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Paul K. Engskov ( CN=Paul K. Engskov/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Maria Echaveste ( CN=Maria Echaveste/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Michael Cohen ( CN=Michael Cohen/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Jose Cerda III ( CN=Jose Cerda III/OU=OPO/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Barbara A. Barclay ( CN=Barbara A. Barclay/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
�..ARMS Email System
Page 5 of5
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Brenda M. Anders ( CN=Brenda M. Anders/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
On Thursday afternoon, January 14, 1999, the President will travel to New
York City where he will attend a Wall Street Project reception.
On Friday
morning, he will deliver the keynote address to the Wall Street Project
Conference and then return to the White House.
Deadlines for the President's Trip Book are as follows:
NY Background Memos:
DUE WED., JAN. 13, AT NOON
political Memo
CEQ Hot Issues
Cabinet Affairs Hot Issues
Accomplishments
Event Memos:
DUE WED., JAN 13, AT 6:00 P.M.
Wall Street Project Gala Reception
Wall Street Project Keynote Address
Please call or email me if you have any questions.
Thanks.
�Page 1 of4
" ARMS Email System
"0
•
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP [ WHO]
)
CREATION DATE/TIME: 11-JAN-1999 17:52:46.00
SUBJECT:
Edley Cover Memo
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ] )
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
______________________ Forwarded by Laura,Emmett/WHO/EOP on 01/11/99 05:52
PM ------------,---------------
Cathy R. Mays
01/11/99 05:50:58 PM
Record Type:
Record
To:
Laura Emmett/WHO/EOP
cc:
Subject:
Edley Cover Memo
==================== ATTACHMENT
1 ====================
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE:
0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
Unable to convert ARMS_EXT: [ATTACH.D57]MAIL47011511N.036 to ASCII,
The following is a HEX DUMP:
FF575043C9060000010A02010000000205000000FB17000000020000F4515EC16B26FF5BE5E996
7B727F19368F508AOA41B31CAC5FE96F33986CBB282AEF1E4FAC2754CC7E8F86C9B5CEAE8FA7DF
1AB7827DE2DF64B6D420FC304D22EF72001129C5AOD6CE9C7EAAE5C22C9F35E6EFF7A5B245D839
DFA5150E32B97E355D7465B1B5347C61CE30BBB84D41240411335BF4F2B4F5AC984C3AC4795118
B050BADEB30514299DODAFA6C0975C668A5584991FOCOA4A4A5D291EOFOAD27F650F10F30850D7
6502F864B14B8FE83404017AAA236FD9E9E1923DC23BA4FD5351AECD8E5F3B3D9A060A1A4E5E1F
A1F74D8F121BEAFC53CAAB500B33C80B325DF202D61B4E5B009B42FE95E6ACODB3123E38A0804F
4635A17A1B5DB7D6C911FBEOFE632AEEB91305ED1C6227874EFB44DFA98F95C37A6C8F06D9E49C
F441132E0415F12B14D09BOE54B6504E498F90C3E5FOA58632C218OAD9A664CDADC4F83978F1FB
004268717218878D056BD856E6D1C342A9DF5236C972D703627260C42E26D84046548157AC6B7C
FD45728131249C63DDF31AFAB5E59BE747765679E472D91100C16A57F09063480ECCEA53C2693A
F63C30CC580B54E689EFC708D8E2183771135ACEF35EF15E7AD7542DB1DOA1E7F81D5E403AC01D
6A1B7A70552F83EBOFC38C245E2A22460CF5608AE253B227DECB633F730CD5213A4984DC9297AD
37A441EC6C02002800000000000000000000000823010000000B01000030040000005501000000
4E0000003B05000009250100000006000000890500000B3002000000280000008F050000087701
00000040000000B705000008340100000014000000F70500000802010000000FOOOOOOOB060000
081001000000020000001A060000096D01000000170000001C0600000805010000000800000033
060000080501000000080000003B060000000000000000000000003B0600000000000000000000
00003B060000060801000000380000004306000000000000000000000000430600000000000000
000000000043060000000000000000000000004306000000000000000000000000430600000000
000000000000000043060000000000000000000000004306000000000000000000000000430600
000000000000000000000043060000000000000000000000004306000000000000000000000000
�AutomEtod Records M,magem8nt System
.
Hex-Dump Conversion
January 12, 1999
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
Bruce Reed
Mike Cohen
SUBJECT:
Reaction to Education Issues in Chris Edley's Memo
The attached memo from Chris Edley argues that our ESEA proposals do not go far
enough. At the same time, he complains that our proposal to require states to end social
promotion will alienate progressives. At your request, we have developed a new performance
incentive proposal to help ensure that we demand and reward results. In keeping with your
principle that future increases should be contingent on improved performance, we recommend
that performance incentives only be given to communities that are making progress with the
federal education funds they already receive. This is different from Chris's proposal, which
would create a whole new funding stream and leave Title 1 untouched.
Our ESEA proposal demands results in other ways as well. It requires states to set
standards, measure student performance, end social promotion, issue school report cards, identify
and reward outstanding schools and intervene to tum around lowest performing schools. If these
schools don't improve, the state must reconstitute the school and make wholesale staff changes,
or by close it down altogether and reopen it with new staff or as a charter school. States must
adopt and implement these practices as a condition of receiving any funds under ESEA. If they
fail to do so in a serious and effective fashion, the Secretary of Education will have the authority
to withhold funds from the state.
Our proposal to end social promotion may well be controversial in some quarters, but it is
sound and will be effective. We do not share Chris's view that ending social promotion is "a
distraction" from your education reform agenda. On the contrary, it is a central part of holding
schools, teachers and students accountable for results, as you demonstrated with the eighth grade
test in Arkansas and as Chicago, Boston, and other communities are d.emonstrating today. Our
approach requires states to phase in, over five years, an end to social promotion, thereby
squarely focusing the attention of students, teachers, parents and the entire school system on
getting kids to meet standards. The phase-in period will help ensure high quality
implementation, prevent the abuses that Chris fears, and enable states to comply with civil
rights laws addressing use of high stakes tests.
For those who oppose the use of tests to hold students accountable for performance under
almost any circumstance, this requirement will indeed be controversial. The best way to deal
�Autom~t::d Records Mi1nagei~~':)n! System
Hex-Dump COnVG,SiJn
.
with the concerns of the civil rights community is to advocate ending social promotion the right
way -- by coupling it with other steps to strengthen learning opportunities in the classroom,
provide extra help to students who need it, end the use of unqualified teachers, and hold schools
and teachers accountable. Done right, this policy will help rather than harm students. Our
requirements are designed to foster help for students who need it, and thereby increase the
percentage of students promoted on time, rather than increase retention rates. This would track
your own experience with the eighth grade test in Arkansas, where passing rates from 1985 to
1988 increased in reading from 85% to 96%, and in math from 82% to 95%.
�Page 1 of5
ARMS Email System
,.
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
CREATOR: Julie A. Fernandes
(NOTES MAIL)
( CN=Julie A. Fernandes/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD ] )
CREATION DATE/TIME: 11-JAN-1999 18:19:55.00
SUBJECT:
background memo for public charge meeting
TO: Elena Kagan
READ: UNKNOWN
CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ] }
CC: Cynthia A. Rice ( CN=Cynthia A. Rice/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD ] )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Laura Emmett
READ:UNKNOWN
( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP
[ WHO ] )
TEXT:
here it is.
==================== ATTACHMENT
1 ====================
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE:
0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
Unable to convert ARMS_EXT: [ATTACH.D73]MAIL43278511W.036 to ASCII,
The following is a HEX DUMP:
FF575043D8060000010A02010000000205000000DB2400000002000006A9D60670F6B589ADOB58
93F5BECA510AD678BOEC6DE716CFC78458623728A06A628504ABCB8EAD7FOCA081D8A5B8188C7A
3420E9EB289D5C5FOCEBC07BA4C919B13E54FOD9044C5912652E4FA7C14CF8FBEBCC92D70A7742
02401520FOFCDF67A09AC15355CA3881AF7107BDE7AOAAF05E52BC7D05114B51482427EE700F7A
8CE174BCAF41B40DC4785470F59DE6BA90AOCF44F718708A9CCCBDA1CDFA67D135054D999E0708
1B595A2FBC5AOE6017630B09B9024661E184A694ACFD9E4B55352592F1AEE628AD3F2C28D4F11F
BE7294A1?7AA2853BD945F57166C879EA952450102F7FD13B912913B58A5D55DAE12COC79115E1
40B31BAD3C2BAC62465EF0673AA7275B629F5138F9EF2EAAC939E2B8DE73BEE5BFF24E98C101AA
94E1C7E77647E50E10641CD3D555B61E1292DFF5CC43AOEB7849C428C87A2095DCBBE78532DEA5
C2811AFE8F29FE8CF14881967F406F6A6737AFD9EA64D4C1976046CACD142C067ED3086A447CEB
994511345AB760A4C121E4515F1A3C3F3D1D86EA1861F9EA696D3AC80A6790071C7C5163D9B7CB
7940EB3E053040D3BE17B3EA083F78EE7E5A4BOC546D10395FB7C86ACE24A1F578A072CA4E387C
3447A075222712EB855A84CC23678CB96F5AE919EF9B187ACCBA4E7D3D2160808F6277B5640302
56460E38CE02002000000000000000000000000823010000000B010000C0030000005505000000
4EOOOOOOCB04000009250100000006000000190500000B3002000000280000001F050000087701
000000400000004705000008340100000014000000870500000802010000000F0000009B050000
000000000000000000009B05000008050100000008000000AA05000OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAA
0500000B3001000000D8000000B205000000000000000000000000B20500000000000000000000
0000B205000000000000000000000000B205000000000000000000000000B20500000000000000
0000000000B205000000000000000000000000B205000000000000000000000000B20500000000
0000000000000000B205000000000000000000000000B205000000000000000000000000B20500
0000000000000000000000B205000000000000000000000000B205000000000000000000000000
B205000000000000000000000000B205000000000000000000000000B205000000000000000000
000000B205000000000000000000000000B205000000000000000000000000B205000000000000
000000000000B20500000B30010000004E0000008A06000000984C006F00630061006C00200048
00500020004C006100730072004A006500740020003500500020006F006E0020004C0050005400
3100000000000000000000000000000000000000000057494E53504F4F4COOOOOOOOOOC800C800
2C012C012C012C01C800C800300000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000B0100002800C8196810480DOO0011090000005AOOOB010000
103600540069006D006500730020004E0065007700200052006FOO6D0061006E00200052006500
�"
Automoted Records McoagemGnf Svsfem
Hox-Dump Conversion .
MEMORANDUM FOR ELENA KAGAN
FROM:
Julie Fernandes
CC:
Cynthia Rice
RE:
Public Charge -- remaining legal issues
DATE:January 11, 1999
Recent changes in the welfare and immigration laws, along with changes in the Medicaid
program, have created some confusion about how Medicaid and Food Stamps should be
considered in the determination of whether an alien is or is likely to become a "public charge."
Determination as a "public charge" has significant consequences for an alien -- it can cause them
to be denied admission to the United States, deported, or denied permanent residency. By
statute, the INS and State Department are required to consider the alien's age, health, family
status, assets, resources, financial status, education and skills when considering whether he or she
is or is likely to become a public charge.
There have been documented instances in which aliens have been denied re-entry to the U.S.
because they had received Medicaid or Food Stamps. Moreover, aliens have been told that
receipt of Medicaid and/or Food Stamps will have a negative effect on their immigration status.
These cases have translated into widespread concern in immigrant communities about legal
receipt of these benefits, even where the beneficiary is a U.S. citizen child. The concern about
negative immigration consequences associated with the legal use of Medicaid and Food Stamps
interferes with the President's goals of increasing insurance coverage and improving public
health.
After much discussion and debate, the INS and the State Department have agreed to issue
guidance that past or current use of Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP),
or Food Stamps (or their state analogs) is not to be considered in determining whether a person is
likely to become a public charge for purposes of admission to the U.S. or adjustment of status,
except where an alien has received long-term institutionalized care funded by Medicaid.
However, we have not reached resolution on how these programs should be treated for purposes
of deportation based on having become a public charge. Section 237(a)(5) ofthe INA states that
. "[ a]ny alien who, within five years after the date of entry, has become a public charge from
causes not affirmatively shown to have arisen since entry is deportable." Under the INS's current
policy -- informed by a 1948 decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), Matter of B.
-- if an alien is subject to the new binding affidavit of support (post-December 1997 aliens only)
and (1) receives a public benefit (like Medicaid or TANF) within five years after entry, (2) there
is a demand for repayment ofthe value of that benefit from the benefit-granting agency, and (3)
the sponsor refuses to pay, the alien can be subject to deportation for being a public charge. The
1
�'\ll~Cf:~\"[: r~rords ManagGmGnt System
I..
~;.·J~ITIP ConvUlsion
theory is that since the new affidavit of support creates a binding obligation on the part of the
sponsor to support the alien, a failure on the sponsor's part to meet that obligation creates an
unpaid debt for which the alien is responsible, and thus the alien is deportable as a public charge.
With regard to the receipt of federal welfare benefits, this rule has almost no application -- most
aliens entering the U.S. are not eligible for Medicaid and/or Food Stamps for the first five years
(unless, of course, we manage to restore some benefits to post-Welfare Act aliens in FY 2000).
However, states are free to provide welfare-like benefits (including state-only food and health
benefits) to post-Welfare Act aliens. Thus, aliens in jurisdictions where state-only benefits are
available may be deterred from taking advantage of these programs if they believe there may be
deportation consequences down the road. In addition, some states do not make clear whether
benefits offered are state-only or federally financed, and thus some aliens may be deterred from
taking advantage of any medical and/or food benefits for fear of the possible deportation
consequences.
Issue #1
We would like to be able to assure legal immigrants that legal use of Medicaid, CHIP, and Food
Stamps -- or their state analogs -- would never lead to deportation. The legal question that we
have posed to the Department of Justice is how we can get to this result in light ofthe
aforementioned BIA case (Matter ofB.) that sets out this multi-part test. for when a finding of
public charge is triggered. According to DOJ, the binding affidavit of support creates just the
kind of debt that Matter ofB. contemplated.
The Department has indicated that in order for the Attorney General to take certain programs
(like Medicaid or Food Stamps) off the table for purposes of triggering the Matter of B. test, she
must issue a regulation. However, they have suggested that it may be possible to issue interim
guidance that directs INS officers not to consider Medicaid or Food Stamp use as a basis for a
debt that could trigger deportation, pending the issuance of a regulation that effects this change.
OLC is looking into whether this option is legally permissible.
Issue #2
We would like the INS's guidance to layout a clear analytical distinction between those
programs that should be considered for purposes of the public charge analysis, and those that
should not.
The current version of the guidance lists examples of those programs that should be considered
in the public charge analysis (TANF, SSI) and those that should not be considered (Food Stamps,
Medicaid, WIC, etc.), but does not articulate the basis for distinguishing one group from the
other. Thus, if an immigration or consular officer is presented with an alien who is receiving
benefits from a program not listed, there is no guidance to that officer about whether to consider
2
�AutCi:I~.:~d Records Rlcnar?i:::mf Sirstem
Hex-Dump Convti,siJn
this program for public charge purposes.
HHS has made the argument to the INS that the distinction should be between cash and non-cash
benefits (with an exception for those who reside in a long-term care institution; though the
benefit they receive is non-cash, they are wholly dependent on it for food and shelter). The State
Department, while not endorsing any particular framework for the overall distinction, has long
relied on the conclusion that Food Stamps are "supplemental" for determining that receipt of
Food Stamp benefits should not be considered for purposes of public charge.
According to DOJ and INS, they have not yet concluded whether they can -- in light oftheir past
administrative decisions re: public charge -- separate programs based on a cash/non-cash or a
supplementaVnon-supplemental distinction.
3
�'.
..-
Page 1 of 11
,. ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Cynthia A. Rice ( CN=Cynthia A. Rice/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME: II-JAN-1999 18:23:45.00
SUBJECT:
REVISED Edits to OMB's tobacco write-up
TO: Laura Emmett ( CN=Laura Emmett/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: J. Eric Gould ( CN=J. Eric Gould/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Cathy R. Mays ( CN=Cathy R. Mays/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Thomas L. Freedman ( CN=Thomas L. Freedman/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TO: Bruce N. Reed ( CN=Bruce N. Reed/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Please look at revised and give me any comments tonight.
conflicting comments I took Bruce's. Let me flag:
Where I had
(I') While Tom didn't jump at the chance to make a moral case for purchase
guarantees, we worked in the concept under farmers.
(I also added
affected rural communities under the menu)
(2) Treasury believes the state settlement plus a) 55 cents b) accelerated
excise tax and c) FDA we will cut youth smoking in half. However, I left
this point out because of Bruce's concern we couldn't have it both ways
(downplay the tax amount and still say we're meeting our goal).
Treasury
believes the state settlement plus the other price increases will reduce
youth smoking by 30 percent (this includes a very small nonprice effect
which rises to 10 percent under our plan when full FDA authority is ass
umed) .
(3) I added more on FDA as suggested -- any comments?
(4) Linda Ricci is on alert we may need to pull the Medicare graph -- she
will let me know the drop dead time.
Cynthia A. Rice
01/11/99 03:35:23 PM
Record Type:
Record
To:
cc:
Bruce N. Reed/OPD/EOP, Elena Kagan/OPD/EOP
Thomas L. Freedman/OPD/EOP, J. Eric Gould/OPD/EOP, Cathy R.
�· ARMS Email System
Page 2 of 11
Mays/OPD/EOP, Laura Emmett/WHO/EOP
Subject:
Edits to OMB's tobacco write-up
Here's my effort to edit OMB's tobacco budget section -- I'm still not
sure it strikes the right tone.
In particular, how do you want to
describe the price increase? Do you want to say it will enable us to cut
youth smoking in half?
I edited that and other parts out to tone it down
a bit.
Also, do you want the Medicare suit in there?
I added it.
I also took a
stab at farmers.
I'll tell Linda Ricci we're working on it.
==================== ATTACHMENT
1 ====================
ATT CREATION TIME/DATE:
0 00:00:00.00
TEXT:
Unable to convert ARMS_EXT: [ATTACH".D41]MAIL440595112.036 to ASCII,
The following is a HEX DUMP:
FF575043CE060000010A0201000000020500000048260000000200001EB5E5E3598756404B87CB
49363D79B9288E5BFEB4EF26483D9C3645B9EIOC69C7E5F82E48D7E7BBE0875D2BD69DC75AF399
OCEC7DC2AB95D577432204C9793B17C91D30F44D8C90D7BAC1769CCF2DAE58802C39F51E17E5DB
EIC6D56602FF8C9CA7569AOBB346C5C36615A50F6B1A6453FDF135D96A02450E19E34C5AD7D405
99441562235869B07008FD3A4327C34907AD3D26D47D76D9DDA152ABA4914069349610BD523F50
E81ADFOOE19572C8E4E99823C2550BB2440003AEAC6FE9167202229F86A93462F985AOAIAC4CAD
63442EF24F225A8363A5DA6A8842E62185676171261B84E9DBD4956BIF17C661602A14053C33FC
9DBCF4620D3C7F2DA8320928D14D2BE2F3EAEAEB81CE97477E5165694379DAOB232C04443818B6
882AB76FBB501FCF5B6E5B5445D2FD2A85C656F2F476EF1A7ABD03A2C031A548DF8485ACA4AAE6
75B438729151775F2F7D29FD042A64BD4F14D6F7FAE3ECCBE8920249005D8CCC39F9B9CB9155E7
C9DB63AOF07B4BC391A38AC6A7962A43F2CCOB07924FF81D96A0916EA96A276D60B18C8527F7AC
D29C524F8A313E8495B5D55ED~1~0]EQ6C399660499E6FCD3C4F142FAF6131C7F74743CBE2BECB
0068CE973E4A46EOBE3D65E99A9FF83DC765BBF79D138C9755198021D45F156CC28D8612D91950
0310299CAD02002000000000000000000000000823010000000B010000C003000000550EOOOOOO
4EOOOOOOCB04000009250100000006000000190500000B3002000000280000001F050000087701
000000400000004705000008340100000014000000870500000802010000000F0000009B050000
08050100000008000000AA050000081D0100000000000000B20500000055010000003COOOOOOB2
05000000000000000000000000B205000000550800000032000000EE0500000055020000003200
0000200600000055020000002E0000005206000000000000000000000000520600000000000000
000000000052060000000000000000000000005206000000000000000000000000520600000000
000000000000000052060000000000000000000000005206000000000000000000000000520600
000000000000000000000052060000000000000000000000005206000000000000000000000000
520600000000000000000000000052060000000000000000000000005206000000000000000000
000000520600000000000000000000000052060000000000000000000000005206000000000000
000000000000520600000B30010000004E000000800600000098430079006E0074006800690061
002700730020004C006F00630061006C0020005000720069006EOO740065007200000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000057494E53504F4F4COOOOOOOOOOC800C800
2C012C012C012C01C800C800300000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000B0100002800C8196810480DOO0011090000005AOOOB010000
103600540069006D006500730020004E0065007700200052006FOO6D0061006E00200052006500
670075006C00610072000000000000000000010002005802010000000400280000000000000000
0000000000000000000000011202002400A1000000A10000000AOO000001050100450002050100
0200030501004400040501000200050501000B0006050200170007050100440008050100440009
�Autom8t~d Records Management System
Hex-Dump Conversion
Stopping Youth Smoking:
Every day, 3,000 children become regular smokers and 1,000 have
their lives shortened because of it. Almost 90 percent of adult smokers began smoking by age
18 and today, 4.5 million children aged 12 to 17 -- 37 percent of all high school students -smoke cigarettes. Tobacco is linked to over 400,000 deaths a year from cancer, respiratory
illness, heart disease and other problems. To end this public health crisis, we must have a
focused public health effort to reduce youth smoking. The 1998 State Attorneys General Tobacco
S state tobacco settlement was an important step in the right direction, as the tobacco industry
affirmed its responsibility to pay for health care costs caused by tobacco. but more must be
done to protect our children and preserve public health hold the tobacco industry accountable.
The Administration is pursuing a two pronged approach believes a few key additional steps to
reduce youth smoking must be taken at the national level:
Raise the price of cigarettes, so fewer young people start to smoke.
Public health experts agree
that the single most effective way to cut youth smoking is to raise the price of cigarettes:
For e'lery 10 cents additional per pack, estimates shO'.'t' that 270,000 fewer teenagers ,,.,,ill
begin smoking over the next five years and more than 90,000 premature deaths 'if ill be
a'ioided as a result. Last year, the President called for an increase of $1.10 per pack (in
constant dollars) to help cut youth smoking in half'ifithin five years. This year, we can
build on the increases already agreed to between the tobacco companies and the states and
those already legislated by the Congress and lA.-s a result, we can '/l'Ork '!lith the Congress and,
'!lith a single propose an increase of only half this amount. reach the target this year.
The funds that result from this policy will cover tobacco-related health care costs. Each year,
the Federal government spends billions of dollars treating tobacco-related diseases --m for our
armed forces, our veterans, and our federal employees others. It is fitting that the tobacco
industry reimburse US taxpayers for these costs, just as it has already agreed to do for the
states.
-Give Reaffirm the Food and Drug Administration}. fuD authority to keep cigarettes out of the
hands of children and support critical public health efforts to preyent youth smoking. The
Administration will again propose legislation that confirms the FDA's authority to regulate
tobacco products: to halt advertising targeted at children, and to make sure that cigarettes are
not sold to them. To help curb youth access to tobacco products and support tobacco
prevention programs in states and local communities, the Administration's budget will
double the funding for the Food and Drug Administration's tobacco budget to $68 million and
increase funding for the Centers for Disease Control's tobacco control efforts by one-third,
from $73 to $100 million. Moreover, the Administration will continue to support measures
to hold the tobacco industry accountable for reducing youth smoking.
Protect farmers and farming communities.
The Administration is committed to working with
all parties to protect tobacco farmers and their communities, and will monitor closely
on-going efforts by the states and private industry should additional actions be needed.
�Automated Records Manage~ent System
Hex-Dump Conversion
Since US taxpayers paid a substantial portion of the Medicaid costs that were the basis for
much of the state settlement with the tobacco companies, Federal law requires that the Federal
government recoup its share. However, the Administration will again support legislation to
waive direct federal recoupment, if states agree to use a portion of fumis from the settlement for
programs curreRtly financed by federal ta)'payers. is open to working with the states to enact
tobacco legislation that, among other things, resolves these federal claims in exchange for a
commitment by the states to use tobacco money for specified activities including public health
and children's programs.
In addition to these Medicaid costs, tobacco-related health problems have cost the
Medicare program billions of dollars over the last three decades. To recover these losses,
the U,S. Department of Justice intends to bring suit against the tobacco industry, and the
new FY 2000 budget will contain $20 million to pay for the necessary legal costs. All
recoveries will be used to preserve and protect Medicare for future generations.
Tobaeeo is lifH(ed to o'ler 400,000 deaths a year from eaneer, respiratory illness, heart
disease, and other health problems. Eaeh year, a million young people beeome regular smokers,
300,000 of whom will die earlier as a result. The budget ineludes $61 million of additional
funds for tobaeeo related aetivities in the CDC and the FDA, $27 million ofvlhieh will pay for
e*panding CDC's e),isting 8tate based tobaeeo prevention aetivities, and $34 million ofwhieh
will support FDA's outreaeh and enforeement aetivities.
�Autom8ted Records Management System
Hex-Dump Conversion
Stopping Youth Smoking:
Every day, 3,000 children become regular smokers and 1,000 have
their lives shortened because of it. Almost 90 percent of adult smokers began smoking by age
18 and today, 45 million children aged 12 to 17 -- 37 percent of all high school students
smoke cigarettes. Tobacco is linked to over 400,000 deaths a year from cancer, respiratory
illness, heart disease and other problems. To end this public health crisis, we must have a
focused public health effort to reduce youth smoking. The 1998 State Attorneys GeneFaI Tobacco
S state tobacco settlement was an important step in the right direction, as the toba,cco industry
affirmed its responsibility to pay for health care costs caused by tobacco. but more must be
done to protect our children and preserve public health hold the tobacco industry accountable.
The Administration is pursuing a two pronged approach believes a few key additional steps to
reduce youth smoking must be taken at the national level:
n
Raise the price of cigarettes, so fewer young peopJe start to smoke.
Public health experts agree
that the single most effective way to cut youth smoking is to raise the price of cigarettes-:for every 10 cents additional per pack, estimates show that 270,000 fewer teenagers will
begin smoking over the next five years and more than 90,000 premature deaths will be
avoided as a result. Last year, the President called for an increase of $1.10 per pack (in
constant dollars) to help cut youth smoking in half within fi're years. This year, we can
build on the increases already agreed to between the tobacco companies and the states and
those already legislated by the Congress and As a result, we can work with the Congress and,
with a single propose an increase of enly half this amount. reach the target this year.
The funds that result from this policy will cover tobacco-related health care costs. Each year,
the Federal government spends billions of dollars treating tobacco-related diseases --in for our
armed forces, our veterans, and our federal employees others. It is fitting that the tobacco
industry reimburse US taxpayers for these costs, just as it has already agreed to do for the
states.
Reaffirm the Food and Drug Administration), full authority to keep cigarettes out of the
hands of children. The Administration will again propose legislation that confirms the FDA's
{;We
authority to regulate tobacco products in order to halt advertising targeted at children, and to
curb minors' access to tobacco products. mii-lce sure that eigarettes are net sold to them.
While the state settlement limits tobacco advertising, it still allows certain marketing
practices targeted at children, including newspaper and magazine advertising and retail signs
near schools. Moreover, only by reaffirming FDA's authority can Congress ensure that
America's children are protected from the next generation of tobacco industry marketing.
We should take this matter out of the courts and ensure that the FDA -- the nation's leading
health consumer protection agency, providing oversight over food, drugs, and medical
devices -- has full authority to protect our children from tobacco.
Support critical public health efforts to prevent youth smoking. To help support tobacco
prevention programs in states and local communities, the Administration's budget will
double the funding for the Food and Drug Administration's tobacco budget to $68 million and
�Autom2t~c\ Records Management System
Hex-Dump Conversion
increase funding for the Centers for Disease Control's tobacco control efforts by one-third,
from $73 to $100 million. In addition, the Administration will continue to support measures
to hold the tobacco industry accountable for reducing youth smoking.
Protect farmers and farming communities.
The Administration remains committed to
protecting tobacco farmers and their communities, and is monitoring closely on-going efforts
by state, farmer, and industry representatives to provide funding and purchase commitments
to tobacco farmers. The Administration looks forward to working with all parties, as
needed, to ensure the financial well-being of tobacco farmers, their famillies, and their
communities. Farmers who never marketed cigarettes to children and worked hard to sell a
legal crop should be protected.
Since US taxpayers paid a substantial portion of the Medicaid costs that were the basis for
much of the state settlement with the tobacco companies, Federal law requires that the Federal
government recoup its share. However, the Administration will again SliPPOFt legislation to
waive direct Federal reCOlipment, if states agree to lise a portion of flinds from the settlement for
programs clirrentJy financed by Federal taxpayers. is open to working with the states to enact
tobacco legislation that, among other things, resolves these federal claims in exchange for a
commitment by the states to use tobacco money for efforts to reduce youth smoking, public
health and children's programs, and affected rural communities.
In addition to these Medicaid costs, tobacco-related health problems have cost the
Medicare program billions of dollars over the last three decades. To recover these losses,
the U.S. Department of Justice intends to bring suit against the tobacco industry, and the
new FY 2000 budget will contain $20 million to pay for necessarv legal costs. All
recoveries will be used to preserve and protect Medicare for future generations.
Teeaeee is lilli,ea te ever 400,000 aeaths a year HeFB sanser, respiratery inaess, heart
aisease, ana ether health pFeelems. Eash year, a FBilliea ymmg peeple seseme regular smekers,
300,000 efwhem will aie earlier as a reslilt. The eliaget inslliaes $61 miniea efaaaitieaal
fimas fer teeasse relatea astivities in the CDC ana the FDA $27 miniea efwhish will pay fer
e~(paaaing CDC's existiag State easea teeasse pre¥eatiea aeti'lities, ana $34 FBiIlien efwhieh
will slippert FDA's elitreaeh aaa eafereemeat aetivities.
�ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
-Page 1 of 1
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Jennifer L. Klein ( CN=Jennifer L. Klein/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME:11-JAN-1999 18:29:56.00
SUBJECT:
Clinic Safety
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Bruce N. Reed ( CN=Bruce N. Reed/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Neera Tanden ( CN=Neera Tanden/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
We are ready to go.
Paper is done, groups are fine, etc.
for some support in the law enforcement community too.
We are looking
A thought about whether we should do this as a leak or in the State of the
Union.
I think if the President talks about this in the State of the
Union it will be much more difficult to get this done in appropriations.
I think I'd therefore prefer a leak. Also, next week is the anniversary
of Roe v. Wade, and I think this becomes more of an abortion message and
less of a "domestic terrorism" issue if we do it during that week.
Any
new thoughts about who we would give this to if we leak it?
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
007. email
SUBJECTffITLE
DATE
Christopher Edley Jr. to Elena Kagan and Maria Echaveste re:
returning your call (I page)
0111111999
RESTRICTION
P6/b(6)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPD ([Kagan])
OA/Box Number: 250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[01/1111999]
2009-1006-F
bm79
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - 144 U.S.c. 2204(a)1
Freedom of Information Act -15 U.S.c. 552(b)1
PI
P2
P3
P4
b(l) National security classified information l(b)(l) of the FOIAI
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
an agency l(b)(2) of the FOIAI
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute l(b)(3) of the FOIAI
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information l(b)(4) of the FOIAI
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(b)(6) of the FOIAI
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes l(b)(7) of the FOIAI
b(S) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions l(b)(S) of the FOIAI
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells l(b)(9) of the FOIAI
National Security Classified Information l(a)(l) of the PRAI
Relating to the appointment to Federal office l(a)(2) of the PRAI
Release would violate a Federal statute l(a)(3) of the PRAI
Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information l(a)(4) of the PRAI
PS Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors 10)(5) of the PRAI
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(a)(6) of the PRAI
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.c.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
�Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
AND TYPE
008. email
SUBJEcrrrlTLE
DATE
Christopher Edley, Jr. to Elena Kagan and Maria Echaveste reo Notice
of Visiting Appointments (I page)
01/11/1999
RESTRICTION
Personal Misfile
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
Automated Records Management System [Email]
OPO ([Kagan])
ONBox Number: 250000
FOLDER TITLE:
[01/11/1999]
2009-1006-F
bm79
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act· 144 U.S.c. 2204(a)1
Freedom of Information Act -IS U.S.c. SS2(b)1
PI National Security Classified Information l(a)(I) of the PRAI
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office l(a)(2) of the PRAI
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute l(a)(3) of the PRAI
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
financial information )(a)(4) of the PRAI
PS Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
and his advisors, or between such advisors la)(5) of the PRAI
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(a)(6) of the PRAI
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
of gift.
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.c.
2201(3).
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
b(l) National security classified information l(b)(l) of the FOIAI
an agency l(b)(2) of the FOIAI
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute l(b)(3) of the FOIAI
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
information l(b)(4) of the FOIAI
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy l(b)(6) of the FOIAI
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes l(b)(7) of the FOIAI
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
financial institutions l(b)(8) of the FOIAI
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
concerning wells l(b)(9) of the FOIAI
�ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
Page 1 of 1
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: "Christopher Edley, Jr." <edley@law.harvard.edu> ( "Christopher Edley, Jr."
CREATION DATE/TIME: Il-JAN-1999 19:36:05.00
SUBJECT:
Over the top
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN;Elena Kagan/OU;OPD/O;EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
CC: Maria Echaveste ( CN;Maria Echaveste/OU;WHO/O;EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Wow. That was perhaps a bit over the top. Take 15 percent off of that,
please!
�ARMS Email System
Page I of I
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Janet Murguia ( CN=Janet Murguia/ou=wHO/O=EOP [ WHO 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME:11-JAN-1999 20:16:35.00
SUBJECT:
Thank you
TO: Sally Katzen ( CN=Sally Katzen/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Jessica L. Gibson ( CN=Jessica L. Gibson/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1
READ:UNKNOWN
CC: Mindy E. Myers
READ:UNKNOWN
( CN=Mindy E. Myers/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
CC: Lawrence J. Stein ( CN=Lawrence J. Stein/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Thanks for taking the time today to brief our Leg. Affairs professional
staff on policy highlights in the State of the Union.
This will be very
helpful to us as we plan further outreach and amplification on the Hill.
Thanks again.
Janet.
�ARMS Email System
RECORD TYPE: PRESIDENTIAL
Page 1 of 1
(NOTES MAIL)
CREATOR: Melissa G. Green ( CN=Melissa G. Green/OU=OPD/O=EOP [ OPD 1 )
CREATION DATE/TIME:11-JAN-1999 23:46:12.00
SUBJECT:
Edley Memo
TO: Elena Kagan ( CN=Elena Kagan/OU=OPD/O=EOP @ EOP [ OPD 1 )
READ: UNKNOWN
TO: Phillip Caplan ( CN=Phillip Caplan/OU=WHO/O=EOP @ EOP [ WHO 1 )
READ:UNKNOWN
TEXT:
Gene gave Jon Orszag and Ceci Rouse the outline of the memo he wants to
write. They are going to produce it by tomorrow afternoon and get Gene's
sign off by tomorrow evening. Then NEC and DPC can combine if that is what
you want to do Elena.
Phil is this timing okay? Let me know if you have
any concerns. Thanks
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Elena Kagan
Description
An account of the resource
<div>
<p>Elena Kagan worked as Associate White House Counsel from 1995-1996 and Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council (DPC) from 1997-1999.</p>
<p>During her work at the White House Justice Kagan worked on many topics including, but not limited to: AIDS, budget appropriations, campaign finance reform, education, health, labor, race, tobacco, Native Americans, and welfare.</p>
<p>In 1999 President Clinton nominated Kagan to the U.S. District Court of Appeals, no hearing was ever scheduled and she was thereby never confirmed.</p>
<p>Note: These records were made available in response to a <a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/freedom-of-information-act-requests">Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)</a> request, FOIA 2009-1006-F. This collection contains both records created by Elena Kagan and records concerning Elena Kagan. </p>
<p><strong>Descriptions of the Sub Collections:</strong></p>
<ul><li><strong><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?search=&advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=70&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Elena+Kagan%27s+White+House+Counsel+Files&range=&collection=&type=&user=&tags=&public=&featured=&exhibit=&submit_search=Search+for+items">White House Counsel Files</a></strong><br /> These records consist of files created and received by Elena Kagan when she served as Associate Counsel to President Clinton from 1995 to 1996. The files include but are not limited to records concerning Amtrak, campaign finance reform, gaming/gambling (especially as it relates to Native Americans), timber, regulatory reform, and welfare. The records include memoranda, notes, correspondence, articles, reports, executive orders, bills, and directives.</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?search=&advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=70&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Elena+Kagan%27s+Domestic+Policy+Council+Files&range=&collection=&type=&user=&tags=&public=&featured=&exhibit=&submit_search=Search+for+items">Domestic Policy Council Files</a></strong><br />These records contain files created and received by Elena Kagan when she served as Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council (DPC) from 1997-1999. The files include records concerning domestic policy topics such as AIDS, budget appropriations, campaign finance reform, education, health, labor, race, tobacco, and welfare. The records include memoranda, correspondence, articles, and reports.</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?search=&advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=70&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=White+House+Staff+%26+Office+Files+re+Elena+Kagan&range=&collection=&type=&user=&tags=&public=&featured=&exhibit=&submit_search=Search+for+items">White House Staff Files re Elena Kagan</a></strong><br />These records are compiled from a variety of staff office files including the Chief of Staff, Personnel, Office of First Lady, Counsel, and DPC and include correspondence, memorandum, forms, and reports all concerning or having to do with Elena Kagan.</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?search=&advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=70&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=White+House+Office+of+Records+Management+Files+re+Elena+Kagan&range=&collection=&type=&user=&tags=&public=&featured=&exhibit=&submit_search=Search+for+items">White House Office of Records Management Files (WHORM)</a></strong><br />These records are from the White House Office of Records Management (WHORM) subject file series. The Clinton Presidential Library inherited a document-level index maintained by WHORM during the Clinton Administration which tracked some incoming correspondence and other documents as they were circulated throughout the White House and filed by WHORM. The records contain files created and received by Elena Kagan that were tracked by the WHORM Subject File index. The files include records related to a variety of topics such as memoranda, correspondence, and Domestic Policy Council weekly reports. The records are tracked by an alpha/numeric code, and are listed as such.</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?search=&advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=70&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Elena+Kagan%27s+1999+Nomination+to+U.S.+Court+of+Appeals&range=&collection=&type=&user=&tags=&public=&featured=&exhibit=&submit_search=Search+for+items">Elena Kagan's 1999 Nomination to U.S. Court of Appeals</a></strong><br />After serving as the Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council, Elena Kagan was nominated to serve on the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) in1999. Her nomination expired in 2000 without Senate action. The files in this opening contain records from the White House Staff and Office Files, Counsel’s Office and Presidential Personnel, concerning her nomination. The records consist of Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaires, correspondence, law review files, news articles, briefs, and press briefings.</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?search=&advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=70&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Email+Received+by+Elena+Kagan&range=&collection=&type=&user=&tags=&public=&featured=&exhibit=&submit_search=Search+for+items">Email Received by Elena Kagan</a></strong><br />These records consist of email received by Elena Kagan during her time as Associate White House Counsel from 1995-1996 and Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council (DPC) from 1997-1999. In addition to the email proper, these messages include forwards, reply chains, and attachments. The attached documents include notes, memorandum, articles, reports, executive orders, bills, and directives. These email concern a myriad of topics including but not limited to Amtrak, campaign finance reform, gaming/gambling (especially as it relates to Native Americans), timber, regulatory reform, welfare and domestic policy topics such as AIDS, budget appropriations, education, health, labor, race, and tobacco.</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?search=&advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=70&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Email+Sent+by+Elena+Kagan&range=&collection=&type=&user=&tags=&public=&featured=&exhibit=&submit_search=Search+for+items">Email Sent by Elena Kagan</a></strong><br />These records consist of email sent by Elena Kagan during her time as Associate White House Counsel from 1995-1996 and Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council (DPC) from 1997-1999. In addition to the email proper, these messages include forwards, reply chains, and attachments. The attached documents include notes, memorandum, articles, reports, executive orders, bills, and directives. These email concern a myriad of topics including but not limited to Amtrak, campaign finance reform, gaming/gambling (especially as it relates to Native Americans), timber, regulatory reform, welfare and domestic policy topics such as AIDS, budget appropriations, education, health, labor, race, and tobacco.</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?search=&advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=70&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Elena+Kagan%27s+Records+re+Native+Americans&range=&collection=&type=&user=&tags=&public=&featured=&exhibit=&submit_search=Search+for+items">Elena Kagan's Records re Native Americans</a></strong><br />These records were created or received by Elena Kagan during her service as Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council (1997-99). These ten folders were previously opened as part of a Freedom of Information Act request related to Native Americans (FOIA case <a href="http://www.clintonlibrary.gov/Documents/Finding-Aids/2006/2006-0197-F%28seg%203%29.pdf" target="_blank">2006-0197-F</a>).These records consist of memoranda, emails, reports, notes, and clippings.</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?search=&advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=70&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Additional+Materials+re+Elena+Kagan&range=&collection=&type=&user=&tags=&public=&featured=&exhibit=&submit_search=Search+for+items">Additional Materials re Elena Kagan</a></strong><br />These records were taken from the files of Elena Kagan. They include memos to, from, and relating to Elena Kagan’s work on Domestic Policy issues. The records include some memos from Elena Kagan to President Clinton.</li>
<li><strong><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?search=&advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=70&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Federal+Email+re+Elena+Kagan&range=&collection=&type=&user=&tags=&public=&featured=&exhibit=&submit_search=Search+for+items">Federal Email re Elena Kagan</a></strong><br />The federal email re: Elena Kagan consists of 114 email messages that were part of the Federal side of the Clinton White House. The email generally consists of summaries of meetings or telephone conversations in which Elena Kagan was a participant.</li>
</ul></div>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2009-1006-F
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Clinton Presidential Records: Automated Records Management System
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of the Counsel to the President
Domestic Policy Council
First Lady's Office
White House Office of Records Management
Chief of Staff
White House Office for Women's Initiative and Outreach
Automated Records Management System
Tape Restoration Project
Security Office
Presidential Personnel
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1995-1999
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
2945 folders
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Magnetic Disk: Hard Drive
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
[01/11/1999]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
OPD
Automated Records Management System
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2009-1006-F
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Email Received by Elena Kagan
<a href="http://catalog.archives.gov/id/574745" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: Automated Records Management System
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
6/18/2010
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
ARMS - Box 042 - Folder 007
574745